The teachings of the Qur’an and the Hadith openly dishonor and suppress women. The oppression of women is not accidental, incidental or an aberration of some extremists of Islam, but is an intricate part of its theology. The problem lies with Islam for truly committed Muslims are much more likely to enslave women than liberate them in any manner.

The subjugation and enslavement of women helps to keep the Sharia Legal System intact, and Sharia is the foundation of Islam. The liberation of women is perhaps the greatest threat there is to Islam itself.

Thus stoning, honor killing, flogging and the mutilation of females, including their genitalia, are sporadically employed in the Muslim world to keep women in their place. And acid has become a preferred method of choice for the thwarted Eastern Muslim male to show his dominance.

Gender Equality?

This concept does not exist in the Muslim mind as directed by Qur’an and hadith.

As to gender equality the Qur’an flatly states that women are inferior to men. Women as a whole are dishonored and looked down upon in Islam for “Men have a status above women. God is Majestic and Wise.” (Surah 2:228) This phrase references the superiority of Muslim men over women and gender discrimination in Islam is evident and demanded in many of its teachings.

Women have deficient minds: Sahih al-Bukhari 3:48:826: “Narrated by Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said, “Yes.” He said, “This is because of the deficiency of a woman’s mind.”

Women are not fit to be rulers: Sahih Bukhari 88:219: “Narrated Abu Bakra: During the battle of Al-Jamal, Allah benefited me with a Word (I heard from the Prophet). When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.”

Ultimately the woman is no better than an animal or inanimate object in the Muslim mind. And, Allah of the Qur’an has predestined more women than men to be punished with hell. His prophet Muhammad states it simply is fact that “if there is any evil omen in anything, then it is in the woman, the horse and the house.” Further, the Prophet of Islam said a woman is on the same level as a dog or a donkey.

No reputable Muslim scholars question the validity of stating that Islam places women on thesame level as a donkey or dog. The Surah state that when a man is praying if a woman, a dog or a donkey walks in front of him he has to wash himself again and repeat his prayer. Otherwise, his prayer will not be accepted by Allah. Thus, to be a devout Muslim woman and think a devout Muslim man would ever permit her to assume the position of an imam and lead him in prayer is apostasy in Islam. Sahih Bukhari 1:9:490 makes it absolutely clear in the narration by Aisha: “The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, “Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman if they pass in front of the praying people.” I said: “You have made us (i.e. women) dogs.”

In Islam, it is the majority of women who will end up in “Hell” simply for being born as a woman. According to Islam, all those in the “Islamic Hell” are predestined by Allah to spend their eternity there. Therefore, for the majority of the inhabitants of “Hell” to consist of women means that Allah must have predestined more women than men to be punished there.

Sahih Bukhari 4:54:464: “Narrated ‘Imran bin Husain: The Prophet said, “I looked at Paradise and found poor people forming the majority of its inhabitants; and I looked at Hell and saw that the majority of its inhabitants were women.”

The following Hadith explains that the main reason for the majority of the inhabitants of “Hell” being women is because of their ungratefulness to their husbands.

Sahih Bukhari 7:62:125: “Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Abbas: “Then I (Muhammad) saw the Hell-Fire, and I have never before, seen such a horrible sight as that, and I saw that the majority of its dwellers were women.” The people asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is the reason for that?” He replied, “Because of their ungratefulness.” It was said. “Do they disbelieve in Allah (are they ungrateful to Allah)?” He replied, “They are not thankful to their husbands and are ungrateful for the favors done to them. Even if you do good to one of them all your life, when she seems some harshness from you, she will say, ‘I have never seen any good from you.’”

In Hell because of the ludicrous Islamic claim that they are ungrateful to their husbands? How can a woman be grateful to any man proven capable of stoning, whipping, beating, confining, mutilating or repeatedly raping her?

As far as I am concerned all Muslim women should be fighting for gender based equality. The dehumanization of the female to the level of a dog makes it easy for the Muslim male to subject them to all their carnal desires in any format of their choice. The subjugation and enslavement of women is the life-blood of Islam and foundation for the Sharia Legal System. The dignity and liberation of women is a threat to Islam itself through denial of their demonized Islamic religious roots. When you enter the land of Islam you leave the sanity of our universe and tread an alien landscape where murder, massacres, terror, plunder, violence, incest, pedophilia, enslavement and rape are no longer crimes against humanity. And such actions as these are no longer sins against the laws of God but are the very laws of Allah.

Men are in charge of women.

Qur’an 4:34: “Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So, good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them.”

The best woman does not do anything her husband disapproves of.

Al-Tirmidhi 3272: “When Allah’s Messenger was asked which woman was best he replied, ‘The one who pleases (her husband) when he looks at her, obeys him when he gives a command, and does not go against his wishes regarding her person or property by doing anything of which he disapproves’.”

In Islam women are property, essentially a tradeable commodity. An example is found where a Muslim with two wives offers a fellow Muslim his pick between the two and then Muhammad arranges a wedding banquet.

Sahih Bukhari 58:125: “Narrated Anas: When ‘Abdur-Rahman bin ‘Auf came to us, Allah’s Apostle made a bond of fraternity between him and Sad bin Ar-Rabi’ who was a rich man, Sad said, “The Ansar know that I am the richest of all of them, so I will divide my property into two parts between me and you, and I have two wives; see which of the two you like so that I may divorce her and you can marry her after she becomes lawful to you by her passing the prescribed period (Iddah) of divorce. ‘Abdur Rahman said, “May Allah bless you your family (wives) for you.” But ‘Abdur-Rahman went to the market and did not return on that day except with some gain of dried yogurt and butter. He went on trading just a few days till he came to Allah’s Apostle bearing the traces of yellow scent over his clothes. Allah’s Apostle asked him, “What is this scent?” He replied, “I have married a woman from the Ansar.” Allah’s Apostle asked, “How much Mahr (dowry) have you given?” He said, “A date-stone weight of gold or a golden date-stone.” The Prophet said, “Arrange a marriage banquet even with a sheep.”

Under Islam the woman is basically to remain confined to the house unless given male permission to go out. Fortunately, the Prophet appears to have given a general statute that they do not need permission each time they have to defecate.

Quran 33:33: “And abide in your houses and do not display yourselves as was the display of the former times of ignorance. And establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity of sin, O people of the Prophet’s household, and to purify you with extensive purification.”

Sahih Bukhari 4:149: “Narrated ‘Aisha: The Prophet said to his wives, “You are allowed to go out to answer the call of nature.”

Toilet yes, but travel no, for a woman is not to travel without a male custodian and it is the males’ duty to see she does not. Under Islam women simply are not to be allowed to be alone with a non-relative male. “In 2007, a Saudi court sentenced a gang-rape victim to six months’ imprisonment and 200 lashes. Initially, she had been sentenced to 90 lashes for being in the car of a man who was not a relative and flouting the rigid laws on segregation of sexes.” Rediff News.

According to Qur’an and hadith, during her lifetime, a single, married, widowed or divorced Muslim woman is never to be without the guardianship of a man. This control is given to a father, a husband and all the male members of her family in order of their precedence. Even sons assume the role of guardian over their mothers.

Essentially a woman is nothing but a legal minor under Islam and this makes her access to justice even harder. Under Islam a woman is not to file a case or even be heard in court without a legal guardian. And where does this leave her, for it is the male guardian who is most often abusive toward her.

Islamic guardianship discriminatory practices simply keep women away from their basic Canadian legal and human rights, robbing them of any true authority over their own lives.

Sahih al-Bukhari 4:52:250: Narrated Ibn Abbas: That he heard the Prophet saying, “It is not permissible for a man to be alone with a woman, and no lady should travel except with a Muhram (legal custodian) such as her husband or a person whom she cannot marry in any case for ever; (her father, brother, etc.).”Then a man got up and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I have enlisted in the army for such-and-such Ghazwa (raid or battle) and my wife is proceeding for Hajj (pilgrimage).” Allah’s Apostle said, “Go, and perform the Hajj with your wife.” Guardianship even takes precedence over military duty.

WOMEN MUST COVER THEMSELVES for Islam requires them to do so. A woman may present herself without a veil only to family and slaves; and she must also look down to avoid making eye-contact with men.

The covering of cloth is supposed to keep the sexual appetites of passing men at bay when women travel outside the home. This might even save a woman’s life, since she is usually assumed to bear the responsibility of unlawful sexual encounters and thus is subject to stoning and other atrocities.

Clerics, such as Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, have said that unveiled victims of public rape invited their attackers: “If I came across a rape crime – kidnap and violation of honour – I would discipline the man and order that the woman be arrested and jailed for life.’ Why would you do this, Rafihi? He says because if she had not left the meat uncovered, the cat wouldn’t have snatched it… If you take uncovered meat and put it on the street, on the pavement, in a garden, in a park or in the backyard, without a cover and the cats eat it, is it the fault of the cat or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem.”

Quran 24:31: “And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known.”

Sahih Bukhari 6:321: “Muhammad is asked whether it is right for a young woman to leave her house without a veil. He replies, “She should cover herself with the veil of her companion.”

Muhammad issued the command in Quran 24:31 for women to cover themselves and the women hid their faces. Sahih Bukhari 60:282: “Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba: ‘Aisha used to say: “When (the Verse): “They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms,” was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.”

And one of the greatest hurdles to overcome faced in this covering matter is the sheer stupidity of CBC and other media reports that put forth their ignorance as fact and the Canadian public buys into it. A good example is Andrew MacDougall the bozo to your left. He is a Canadian-British national based in London who writes about politics and current affairs. He was previously director of communications for former Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper. Harper certainly should not have allowed this crap-yap yahoo to communicate anything for him. In 2015 when the niqab debates were a ‘hot button item’ this fool wrote: “It should go without saying that the prime minister’s comments don’t necessarily mean that all Muslims are anti-women, or that Islam, as it’s practised in Canada, will lead to a Saudi-style outcome. The prime minister mentioned “culture,” and not “religion,” for a reason, as the practice of covering the face isn’t mandated by the Qur’an. It’s a cultural choice that some make. Indeed, the young woman behind the court challenge has provided an elegant defence of her choice in the Toronto Star.” http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/niqab-debate-necessary-but-the-hysteria-surrounding-it-needs-to-go-1.3001937

Veils and coverings not mandated by the Qur’an and hadith? Give your fool head another rattle MacDougal.

Quran 33:59: “Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them…”

Abu Dawud 2:641: “The said: Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil.”

Once clearing the MacDougal Style Meatheads, another hurdle faced is an out of whack judiciary caught intothe Canadian Islamic Identity Crisis. The wearing of the niqab was disallowed for Canadian citizenship candidates in 2011 when reciting the Oath of Citizenship. This action taken by then Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Jason Kenney sparked confused people to debates and allowed duplicitous actions by sharia driven interest groups to advance their cause.

The matter reached another juncture through the actions of Toronto resident Zunera Ishaq who challenged the ruling that those taking the oath must do so without any face covering. Zunera Ishaq, a Pakistani national and Sunni Muslim who wears a niqab when in public, came to Canada in 2008 and passed her citizenship test at the end of 2013. She expressed willingness to unveil herself and recite the oath in private, but refused the demand to remove her niqāb in a public ceremony. After learning that she would have to remove her niqab in public for the oath-taking she wrote a letter asking that her ceremony be postponed, and filed an application for a review of the policy with the Federal Court in January 2014. She was supported in her actions by the National Council of Canadian Muslims, the radicalized name change group discussed in my posting Evil Times. And, as we know from the facts presented in my article there were and are serious ‘Islamic identity crisis issues’ at stake affecting our national security at play here. Yet, Federal Court Judge Keith M. Boswell who was appointed by Harper in 2014 ruled in Ishaq’s favor. Niqab Controversy: Judge Struck Down Ban Without Referring To ..

The following extracts come from the posting by Morgan Lowrie, Canadian Press, CP February 12, 2015. “Ishaq ‘had sued the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration claiming the government’s policy on veils violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” “A federal judge ruled in Ottawa last week that a portion of the law requiring citizenship candidates to remove their face coverings while taking the oath was unlawful.” “Speaking at an event in Quebec on Thursday, Harper said the government intends to appeal the ruling.” Harper stated: “I believe, and I think most Canadians believe that it is offensive that someone would hide their identity at the very moment where they are committing to join the Canadian family,” he said in Victoriaville, Que. “This is a society that is transparent, open, and where people are equal.”

Do not get caught into the bickering-legal debate about processes of oath taking, for the true issues at stake surround the plaintiff stating her rights were violated under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and the judge did not even consider the Charter in dealing with the complaint filed by our niqab nutbar.

Also, there was and remains a general confusion as to the reality of the circumstance in many ongoing media sideshows that are out of contact with the reality of what Canadians truly think. Three of Canada’s major papers: the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, and the National Post, all applauded the judge’s decision with editorials explaining how religious freedoms must prevail. This out to lunch bunch appear oblivious to the fact that the Islamic dress of the niqab and burka comprise a part of the Muslim sharia designed to subjugate and silence women. Of those who comprehend this, most appear to unfortunately see this matter as simply about the openness and the equality of men and women in Canada and not the intended Islamic political designs. However, as to the donning of the niqab for the Oath at issue: “An Angus Reid poll last year found 90% of Quebecois and nearly 70% of Canadians outside Quebec supported a proposed provincial ban on the niqab in government offices, schools, and publicly funded institutions.”

Nearly 70% of Canadians have already indicated that they would not support the ‘off with the top of his head decision’ reached by Keith M. Boswell as was stated. “To the extent that the Policy interferes with a citizenship judge’s duty to allow candidates for citizenship the greatest possible freedom in the solemnization or the solemn affirmation of the oath, it is unlawful,” he wrote.” The fool dealt with a statement of government policy as put forth in a policy manual. Boswell, wake up and rescind your decision for there is no restriction of freedom in prevention of fraudulent actions. And, under the sector of Citizenship Treason it was clearly shown that no true follower of Islam can take an oath of allegiance to Canada in any format.

So, do not get side-tracked nearly 70% of Canada and look to the security of the nation. And, Judge Keith M. Boswell, it remains highly likely you along with others shall find yourself being litigated against for permitting treason against the laws of our nation. The judiciary has no right to endanger the nation through running down tangents they simply desire to rule from themselves.

The issue is not one about ‘head covering at all’ …it is about “face covering, concealment and values not conducive to the free and open society Canada espouses”. Wearing a turban does not conceal your identity whether you don it in on the soccer field or serve in the RCMP. But, shortly we will give you a look at the Muslim dress shown in ascending order of concealment.

Dress code violators in Pakistan are routinely attacked with acid, they are raped and killed in Iran and brutally repressed in most of the Muslim countries.

Islamic law (Sharia) requires women to cover themselves and the head covering as shown in Qur’an and hadith is certainly a symbol of male domination. Even the veil is truly only optional for unmarried women too old to have children, no longer having sexual desires and are incapable of exciting the passions of men.

Qur’an 24:60: “The women who are past their youth (and can no longer bear children) and do not look forward to marriage will incur no sin if they cast off their outer garments without displaying their adornment. But if they remain modest, that is still better for them. Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing.”

The only place it is not a crime for a woman to speak unveiled is stated in Qur’an 33:55: “It shall be no crime in them as to their fathers, or their sons, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their woman, or the slaves which their right hands possess, if they speak to them unveiled”.

In the West veils, coverings and burqas are recognizable symbols of Islamic fundamentalism, religious distinction and are employed as a statement of political protest to advance sharia. Sometime the issue of the hijab is simply a distraction, a time buying mechanism by which Islam can clog up the legal system. The true intent of Islam is one that follows surah demanding concealment in every format until ascendency permits exposure through domination.

Following are ‘cultural variations’ in dress styles of the supposedly “integrated Syrian and other Islamic girls” that continue to skulk about our Canadian streets. The Syrian refugees are just a further opening of an evil tap that was turned on long ago.

Hijab is the noun form of the Arabic verb meaning “to cover” or “to shelter.” In general, hijab refers to any clothing a Muslim woman wears to fulfil the religion’s requirement for modest dress. However, the word has come to describe this headscarf that covers most of the hair and neck, and sometimes the shoulders. While this garment normally identifies the wearer as a follower of Islam the facial recognition identity is not hindered that would enable easier criminal behavior or security breaching. However, being ‘face free’ does not alter the fact that these individuals will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam.

A khemar is a headscarf that covers the head, neck, shoulders, upper body and arms, leaving only the face exposed. Khemar is the word used in the Qur’an when it refers to a veil or headscarf. Again, we see the general factors as with the hijab. However, being face free does not alter the fact that these individuals will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam.

The chador is a full-length garment made from a semi-circle of cloth draped over the head and open in the front. It is held shut with the hands or teeth and tied at the waist. The chador doesn’t have openings for the hands. It is usually associated with Muslim dress in Iran. A greater degree to concealment is evident. Does the Qur’an demand closure with the teeth so the hands can be free to carry a concealed bomb or to ensure the woman cannot clearly speak out? If held closed to such position with the teeth the men have double protection of the girls not speaking rebellion in any form. I call this the ‘chador bomb closure hold position’. It is bomb free as long as granny does not have it strapped to her torso. In any case, none of this alters the fact that this individual will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam.

Our notorious niqab is a headscarf that covers not only the hair, but also most of the face, leaving only the eyes exposed. You have already assumed this is a woman shown. Why? This could be an effeminate, homosexual or cross dressing transgender Muslim convert-pervert Liberal of some sort. In any case, none of this alters the fact that this is exactly what defines just another died in the wool liar advancing the cause of Islam. It is time to get your ‘head out of the bag babe’ syndrome and castigate the Liberal Lunatics that foment this garbage in Canada.

The completely packaged bulkyburka is a head-to-toe covering seen often in Afghanistan. Women appearing in public were required to wear this covering, usually coloured grey or blue, during the country’s Taliban rule. The entire body is concealed, including the eyes, which are covered with a fabric net that allows the wearer to see. In Canada, you normally run into these what ever they may be, covered in black. Whatever the color does not alter the fact that these girls (if they are girls) will deliberately lie to advance the cause of Islam. I named this garb ‘La Bomba Bag Express’ which could be kind of appropriate given the increasing numbers of Islamic female suicide bombers.

Now, read of the event on Jan 18, 2016 when “brave SAS heroes dressed up in BURKAS, disguising themselves as ISIS commanders’ wives to infiltrate the town and carry out a daring raid. Fearless special forces troops donned the full-length Islamic dress to sneak undetected through the terrorists’ de facto capital Raqqa and take down the terrorist commander. They were driven through the town in a Toyota pick-up truck – the make favoured by jihadi murderers – with the help of local Syrians working with the secret service to help bring down ISIS.

The elite troopers even managed to hide assault weapons, grenades and ammo beneath their roomy ankle-length gowns in case they encountered armed resistance from Islamist militants.

The eight-man SAS squad also eliminated several jihadi fighters after lifting up their burkas and opening fire on the stunned militants, who had no time to hide from the hail of bullets.”

Read the details of this operation and grasp this: They were not potential ‘suicide bombers’ or possibly serving jihad purposes of any sort. This should sink it into your skulls that what is truly Muslim running around in the variant ‘styles’ in Canada must be regarded from the base of Islamic sharia they espouse.

Is the connection sinking in? The garb is not a ‘cultural or civil rights issue’ but represents a basic belief system that is at war with both the Constitution and Traditional values of Canada.

It is absolutely forbidden for a Muslim woman to marry a non-Muslim man. But, Muslim men are not under the same restriction as to their choice of marriage partners. Muslim men are allowed to marry up to four women at the same time, and they are allowed to replace any of these wives with newer ones as long as they stay within the limit of four at a time; but Allah expects a faithful Muslim wife to share her only husband with all other women as sanctioned in the Qur’an.

This is a consequence of the low status of a wife opposed to that of her husband. Islam states a woman simply does not have the intelligence to make decisions that will be comparable to a man’s. (Sahih al-Bukhari 3:48:826: Narrated by Abu Said Al-Khudri.) Thus, she cannot be left to choose her own marriage mate. And just as Muslim males are not allowed to be subordinate to non-Muslims, they cannot permit women to rule them in any matter, for women simply are not fit to be rulers. (Sahih Bukhari 88:219: Narrated Abu Bakra) Insults to the women in Islam – Movement Belgian Ex-muslimsAnd yet, the Muslim male certainly wants to latch on and dominate as many of these ‘lower status creatures’ as he can.

THE POLYGAMY FORMAT IN ISLAM

Marriage to PRE-PUBESCENT GIRLS is covered under pedophilia in Islamic practices, but such marriages are a sizeable part of the polygamy promoted by Islam. Sheikh Abdul-Aziz Al Sheikh, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia stated in 2012 that he considers girls ready for marriage from the age of 10 or 12. “Those who call for raising the age of marriage to 25 are absolutely mistaken,” he added. “Our mothers and grandmothers got married when they were barely 12. Good upbringing makes a girl ready to perform all marital duties at that age.” And as stated in Qur’an 4:3:“And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of other women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then marry only one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline to injustice.”

While followers of the Big Pig are permitted four wives and a number of sex slaves, only Muhammad himself was permitted what seems an unlimited number of female sex toys. (Qur’an 33:50) It appears old sexual greedy guts, grunting like a hog and stinking like a dog, had over 50 wives and sex slaves. Saab al-nabbi? (Insulting the Prophet?) Am I insulting a prophet of God? Certainly not, just insulting well documented sexual Islamic pigs that promote pedophilia, polygamy and many forms of sexual slavery! حذائي هو على رأس

The Quran not only condones polygamy, but Allah also gives Muhammad, only for himself, a special category allowing abundance of females beyond these basic permitted and restricted categories.

Qur’an 4:3: “And if you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry those that please you of other women, two or three or four. But if you fear that you will not be just, then marry only one or those your right hand possesses. That is more suitable that you may not incline to injustice.”

Qur’an 4:24: “And also prohibited are the wives of your sons who are from your own loins, and that you take in marriage two sisters simultaneously, except for what has already occurred. Indeed, Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.”

Qur’an 23:5-6: “And they who guard their private parts. Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed. “

Qur’an 33:50: “O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due compensation and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you of captives and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who emigrated with you and a believing woman if she gives herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet wishes to marry her, this is only for you, excluding the other believers. We certainly know what We have made obligatory upon them concerning their wives and those their right hands possess, but this is for you in order that there will be upon you no discomfort. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.”

The Muslim male has a right to demand unlimited sexin their Marriage Relationships.

Islam oppresses and humiliates women and nowhere purports in any manner that consensual sex is a requirement for the Muslim male. In fact, the opposite is true for verses in the Qur’an give the husband the full authority to demand sex from his wife whenever he wants to.

According to Muhammad, the males right and most important part of a marriage contract is the unrestricted access that a man has to his wife’s vagina. In Sahih Bukhari 62:81: “Narrated ‘Uqba: The Prophet said: “The stipulations most entitled to be abided by are those with which you are given the right to enjoy the women’s private parts (i.e. the stipulations of the marriage contract).”

And Allah tells the man his wives are like fields for him to plough, that they are as a tithe for him that he can approach when he desires and how he desires.

Surah Al-Baqarah 2:223: “Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth righteousness for yourselves. And fear Allah and know that you will meet Him. And give good tidings to the believers.”

Yusif Ali: “Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so, approach your tilth when or how you will.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 60: “Narrated Jabir: Jews used to say: “If one has sexual intercourse with his wife from the back, then she will deliver a squint-eyed child.” So, this Verse was revealed: “Your wives are a tilth unto you; so go to your tilth when or how you will.” (2.223)

Allah quite simply lowers the status of the wives to that of mere sexual objects, stating major concern for the immediate gratification of the sexual desires of the husbands and no apparent concern for the emotional makeup of the wives. Allah essentially grants full permission for Muslim husbands to rape their wives, slaves and captives. Marital rape simply is not a crime in Islam and totally absent under sharia.

RAPE IN ISLAM

Rape is often called sexual assault and constitutes an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse against another person without his or her consent. As such rape is a physical invasion of a sexual nature committed on a person under circumstances in which the victim is unable to prevent or stop the too often very violent assault. Statutory Rape is the term often applied where the victims are in no position to resist and the absence of objection is not of itself regarded in any manner as constituting consent. Victims can be under many different formats of duress making it either impossible or extremely difficult to raise any kind of objection to their attackers.

Islam is a Religion of Rape and consensual sex as the West defines it does not exist, for Allah has given the right for males to rape females. While rape is viewed as a serious crime in all civilized societies it is fully sanctioned by Allah in the Qur’an and hadith. According to the edicts of Islam, rape is jihad and it is no manner considered a sin to have forced sex with a woman if she is a non-Muslim, a captive or a slave. In fact, it is encouraged in the teachings of Islam. Jihad somehow mystically transforms all forms of rape into acts of virtue and Islam is the only religious-political system in the world that has included both rules and the divine authorization of rape in its theology.

Islamic conscience, ethics and morality stand on two basic ideas: that which is permitted (Halal) and that which is not (Haram). Islam condones pedophilia and rape so there simply is nothing vulgar, unethical or immoral in their actions no matter how violent. Their actions are simply Halal, and emulation of the Prophet of Islam himself. Thus, the application of a personal sense of morality and ethics simply does not play any role in the life of a devout Muslim.

We could look at War rape as a typical situation where absence of objection may occur for women captives of war and sex slaves. Allah approves Muslim men to rape women who are taken captive in war, purchased by money, received as a gift or the female offspring of the slaves in their possession. But, the duress that women are under in the context of war rape is no more real than the duress of the circumstance that the victims of any brutal sexual assault have found themselves in. What is absolutely clear in Qur’an verses is that Muslim men do not have to “restrain their carnal desires” in any manner with women be they captives of war or wives. Through the Qur’an and hadiths there continues to emerge a clear picture of divine authorization of rape, adultery and fornication.

Take your blinders off, clean your ears and realize that Islam means Submission and by definition a slave is the most, or has to be the most submissive of all people, for a slave must submit completely to his or her master. Further, Islam leads to Jihad which leads to Rape and Sexual Slavery as ISIS continues to display worldwide. Sexual Slavery leads to Submission versus Death and Submission means Islam. All armies have some criminal soldiers who commit the heinous action of rape. But, it quite another thing to codify rape in your sacred texts and authorize your entire army to do so. The cycle of evil begins and ends with Islam which fuels the Muslim mentality of it is O.K to rape, plunder and butcher. Islam – The Religion Of Rape

But war is not an essential component for satisfying the Muslim males sex drive as Allah shows him the pathway to having sex with slave-girls in times of peace. The following references are from the early years of Muhammad’s ventures when he never waged war on anyone, so they were his times of peace.

But first view this Video which clears many cobwebs about Islamic male rapists during ‘times of peace’. video > 10:00 https://youtu.be/LbpAXRfbE-A

Now, the Qur’an states:

Al-Mu’minun 23:4-6 “And they who are observant of zakah. And they who guard their private parts. Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they will not be blamed.”

What you need to take note of is the females a Muslim man does not need to ‘guard their private parts’ from. These are ‘their wives or those their right hands possess’. The term ‘those their right hands possess’ refers to slave girls and is also inclusive of captives. Thus, the verse clearly lays down the law that one is allowed to have sexual relation with one’s slave-girl as with one’s wife. The basis of such allowance is simply possession and not marriage. Marriage clearly is not a condition necessary for permissible sexual intercourse or the slave-girl would not have to be mentioned separately.

Concurrently, Muslim men are permitted to have sex with as many slave-girls and captives as they possibly can acquire. And, if they stick to their wives and such slave girls ‘they will not be blamed’ by Allah for any wrong doing in satisfying their carnal sexual appetites. Qur’an 33:50 makes a clear distinction between “those whom thy right hand possesses” and true wives. (Qur’an 23:1-6; 70:22-30)

The Islamic Males Right to Unlimited Sex through jihad.

It is against Islam to rape Muslim women, but Muhammad actually encouraged the rape of others captured in battle. For openers watch Islam Does Allow Muslims to Rape Female Captives and Slave Girls video > 6:29 https://youtu.be/2EhNCAP3cz0

Getting back to war and establishing the Muslim warriors right to unlimited sex with slaves and captives, taken as Muhammad’s armies raided town after town. Their prophet provided his men with the holy wisdom to guide them in their treatment of their female captives through what Allah revealed to him. It is shown the prophet of Islam, his followers and companions used war to collect women for their personal sexual use and for trading. Allah’s directives made sexual use and abuse easy for the boys. When made captive, unless she was arbitrarily declared as someone’s wife, the woman immediately became a sex slave.

Muhammad’s special female abundance and category status:

Surah Al-Ahzab 33:50: “O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those [slaves] whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her – specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful”.

The verse not only gives a special privilege to Muhammad to marry as many wives as he desires, but it also makes females of closer biological origin available to him that other Muslims are NOT to be allowed.

Muhammad clearly condones rape by his jihadi soldiers…

Sahih Muslim Book 8:3371: “We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, but at the same time we also desired ransom for them. So, we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing azl. (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception) But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So, we asked Allah’s Messenger and he said: It does not matter”

Essentially Muhammad tells them that it does not matter if they ejaculate in the captive women or not as Allah controls (Islamic doctrine of predestination) who will be born or not. (Sahih al-Bukhari 4138; Sahih Muslim 3384) But, take note of two things: Muhammad did not tell them that they should not be raping their captives; and the soldiers main concern was that they would be potentially lowering their property value for potential resale if the women were not in menstrual cycle when placed on the market. It is documented that many women from the Bi’l-Mustaliq raids were sold into slavery.

In the following example of Islamic immorality Khumus is one-fifth of the spoils of war. Here Muhammad clearly displays belief that slave women who are part of the one-fifth of the spoils of war can be treated like sexual property.

Bukhari: 5:59:637: “Narrated Buraida: The Prophet sent ‘Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus (of the booty) and I hated Ali, and ‘Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave-girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, “Don’t you see this. Ali?” When we reached the Prophet, I mentioned that to him. He said, “O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?” I said, “Yes.” He said, “Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus.”

Muhammad’s states his personal claim to part of the slave booty through jihad:

Allah makes raping captives halal for Muhammad and his Muslim followers. And, the hadith shows that Muhammad personally demanded one of the captured women for his own use.

Sahih Muslim 19:4345: “It has been narrated on the authority of Salama b. al-Akwa who said: We fought against the Fazara and Abu Bakr was the commander over us. He had been appointed by the Messenger of Allah. When we were only at an hour’s distance from the water of the enemy, Abu Bakr ordered us to attack. We made a halt during the last part of the night to rest and then we attacked from all sides and reached their watering-place where a battle was fought. Some of the enemies were killed and some were taken prisoners. I saw a group of persons that consisted of women and children. I was afraid lest they should reach the mountain before me, so I shot an arrow between them and the mountain. When they saw the arrow, they stopped. So, I brought them, driving them along. Among them was a woman from Banu Fazara. She was wearing a leather coat. With her was her daughter who was one of the prettiest girls in Arabia. I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So, we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah met me in the street and said: Give me that girl, O Salama. I said: Messenger of Allah, she has fascinated me. I had not yet disrobed her. When on the next day, the Messenger of Allah again met me in the street, he said: O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your father. I said: She is for you. Messenger of Allah! By Allah. I have not yet disrobed her. The Messenger of Allah sent her to the people of Mecca, and surrendered her as ransom for a number of Muslims who had been kept as prisoners at Mecca.”

The right to rape female prisoners of war includes married women:

Captured women were both raped and shared among the Muslim warriors in the fashion we would term gang or pack rape. But, there came a time when Muhammad’s followers needed to know if Allah would allow them to have sex with married captives as to do so seemed to transgress the adultery laws. As we see, the hadith and Qur’an 4:24 show us that Allah permits Muslims jihadists to have sex with captured women whether married or not.

An-Nisa 4:24: “And also prohibited to you are all married women except those your right hands possess. This is the decree of Allah upon you. And lawful to you are all others beyond these, provided that you seek them in marriage with gifts from your property, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse. So, for whatever you enjoy of marriage from them, give them their due compensation as an obligation. And there is no blame upon you for what you mutually agree to beyond the obligation. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.”

Sunan Abu Dawud: 11:2150: “The Apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So, Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: “And all married women are forbidden unto you save those captives whom your right hands possess.” That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period.”

Imam Ahmad: “Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, “We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah was revealed, Also forbidden are women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Accordingly, we had sexual relations with these women.”

You can only conclude that with the blessing of Allah Muhammad allowed his followers to rape their captives. And Islamic records show that married female captives were raped in the presence of their husbands, who were obviously alive. At the time of decree Allah is also granting Muhammad justification for his own obvious acts of rape.

Nothing is said about these women being sought for permission to have sex, just as the Muslim male does not need permission to have sex with his wives. Allah has already granted it as his right. The canonical hadith collection Sahih Muslim states: “It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a captive woman after she is purified of menses or delivery. In case she has a husband, her marriage is abrogated after she becomes captive”. It appears that they are only required to complete the waiting period to ensure the woman is not pregnant. And, herein underlies the great hypocrisy of most modern jihadist for they are indiscriminately raping all as they fall into their hands.

Female slaves were traded like any other simple commodity by Muhammad and his band of devoted followers.

Ibn Ishaq Hisham 693: “Then the apostle sent Sa-d b. Zayd al-Ansari, brother of Abdu’l-Ashal with some of the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horses and weapons.”

Sahih al-Bukhari: 34:431: “Narrated Anas: Amongst the captives was Safiya. First she was given to Dihya Al-Kalbi and then to the Prophet.”

And as shown prior, his men were reluctant to devalue their new slaves for later resale by getting them pregnant. Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular and he tells them how to proceed.

Sahih Muslim Book 8:3371: “We went out with Allah’s Messenger on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, but at the same time we also desired ransom for them. So, we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So, we asked Allah’s Messenger, and he said: It does not matter”

Essentially Muhammad tells them that it does not matter if they ejaculate in the captive women or not as Allah controls (Islamic doctrine of predestination) who will be born or not. (Sahih al-Bukhari 4138; Sahih Muslim 3384) But, take note of two things: Muhammad did not tell them that they should not be raping their captives; and the soldiers main concern was that they would be potentially lowering their property value for resale if the women were not in menstrual cycle when placed on the market. It is documented that many women from the Bi’l-Mustaliq raids were sold into slavery.

Sahih al-Bukhari: 34:435: “Narrated Zaid bin Khalid and Abu Huraira: that Allah’s Apostle was asked about an unmarried slave-girl who committed illegal sexual intercourse. They heard him saying, “Flog her, and if she commits illegal sexual intercourse after that, flog her again, and on the third or the fourth offense, sell her.”

When proclaimed holy teachings encourage a people to wage wars, to capture the women for raping, as well as tells them to copycat a prophet to engage in unrestrained marriages for sexual gratification you have a formula for social disaster.

Muslims certainly can not admit Muhammad himself endorses not only sex between male owners and their female slaves and captives, but the entire institution of slavery itself. They cannot do so without seriously damaging Islam. And we cannot allow Islam to be further propagated within Canada without seriously damaging ourselves through promoting ideologies of slavery.

PROVING RAPE

The female under Islam and sharia has virtually no means of proving that she had been or is currently being subjected to ongoing rape, sexual assault or other physical abuse. Male dominion enshrined under Islam simply blocks her pathway to justice.

The male is of twice the value to Allah. Allah gives him a double share of the inheritance and states a woman’s testimony is half the value of a man’s. Allah not only denies the women equal rights, he also decrees that their individual witness is not admissible in the sharia courts of law. As to rape? A woman who is raped cannot even accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness that she was treated in such manner. Why would any woman ever consider embracing Islam? Why would any democratic humanitarian government permit such an ideology and political indoctrination to exist within its borders?

Under Islam women have rights that are similar to men, but men are “a degree above them.” And that degree is all that is needed to maintain their ultimate authority in all matters.

Al-Baqarah 2:228: “Divorced women remain in waiting for three periods, and it is not lawful for them to conceal what Allah has created in their wombs if they believe in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have more right to take them back in this period if they want reconciliation. And due to the wives is similar to what is expected of them, according to what is reasonable. But the men have a degree over them in responsibility and authority. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.

Muhammad simply believed and taught that women lack common sense and have deficient minds.

Sahih Al-Bukhari 2658: “The Prophet said: “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said: “Yes.” He said: “This is because of the deficiency of her mind.”

A woman’s worth is physically valued as one-half of a mans.

Males are to inherit twice that of females. Al-Nisa 4:176: “They request from you a legal ruling. Say, ” Allah gives you a ruling concerning one having neither descendants nor ascendants as heirs.” If a man dies, leaving no child but only a sister, she will have half of what he left. And he inherits from her if she dies and has no child. But if there are two sisters or more, they will have two-thirds of what he left. If there are both brothers and sisters, the male will have the share of two females. Allah makes clear to you His law, lest you go astray. And Allah is Knowing of all things.”

An-Nisan 4:11: “Allah thus directs you as regards your Children’s Inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females.” (Yusuf Ali)

A woman’s testimony is half the value of a man’s testimony.

Al-Baqarah 2: 2:282: “O ye who believe! When ye contract a debt for a fixed term, record it in writing. Let a scribe record it in writing between you in terms of equity. No scribe should refuse to write as Allah hath taught him, so let him write, and let him who incurs the debt dictate, and let him observe his duty to Allah his Lord, and diminish naught thereof. But if he who owes the debt is of low understanding, or weak, or unable himself to dictate, then let the guardian of his interests dictate in terms of equity. And call two witness from among your men, two witnesses. And if two men be not at hand, then a man and two women, of such as ye approve as witnesses, so that if one errs through forgetfulness the other will remember. And the witnesses must not refuse when they are summoned.

The reason given for having two women witnesses is that a woman is forgetful and needs another to remind her and a man does not.

From such a discriminatory basis as this how do you think a woman could possible receive justice if she was trying to prove she had been or was being subjected to rape? Since the testimony of woman is only half of that of a man, how can a Muslim woman who is raped by a Muslim man testify against him? His statement against her is automatic witness of itself that she is a liar as decreed by the sacred texts. And the females circumstance is even worse if the man claims that the act was consensual sex for this automatically places her under the cloud of an adulteress, as Islam places the burden of avoiding sexual encounters of any sort on the woman. It is for this reason that rape victims are very often punished by Islamic courts as adulterers. “But it will prevent punishment from her if she gives four testimonies swearing by Allah that indeed, he is of the liars.” An-Nur 24:8.

Women who allege rape without the benefit of the act having been witnessed by four men are presumed to actually confessing to having sex. And, if either they or the accused happens to be married, then they are considered to be guilty of adultery.

In cases where a man denies that sex even took place, in the absence of the four male witnesses the woman’s testimony then becomes a clear “confession” of adultery allowing her to be stoned. The male simply goes unpunished for he never admitted to a sexual act.

Under sharia, rape can only be proven if the rapist confesses or if there are four male witnesses to the act. The necessity of the four witnesses came about because Muhammad refused to accept the testimony of three witnesses as to the adultery of his favorite child bride Aisha. Three witnesses whether true or false corroborated the event, but Muhammad apparently did not want to believe it, and ultimately from it he established the arbitrary rule that four witnesses are required. You read the account by Aisha of the events and reach your own conclusions. But, no matter what conclusion you may reach the necessity of four witnesses became the Islamic law and the theological underpinning of the Sharia rule on rape, as sharia does not recognize rape if there are not four male witnesses or a confession.

Sahih Bukhari 5:59:462: “Narrated `Aisha: Whenever Allah’s Messenger intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah’s used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah’s Messenger after Allah’s order of veiling the women had been revealed. I was carried on the back of a camel in my howdah and carried down while still in it, when we came to a halt. So, we went on till Allah’s Messenger had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So, when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So, I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. In the meanwhile, the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it. In those days, women were light in weight for they did not get fat, and flesh did not cover their bodies in abundance as they used to eat only a little food. Those people therefore, disregarded the lightness of the howdah while lifting and carrying it; and at that time I was still a young girl. They made the camel rise and all of them left along with it. I found my necklace after the army had gone. Then I came to their camping place to find no call maker of them, nor one who would respond to the call. So, I intended to go to the place where I used to stay, thinking that they would miss me and come back to me in my search. While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling was prescribed. So, I woke up when he recited Istirja (“Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji’un”) as soon as he recognized me. I veiled my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word, and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja’. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday while they were at a halt taking a rest. Because of the event some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul.” Urwa said, “The people propagated the slander and talked about it in Abdullah’s presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail.” `Urwa also added, “None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides Abdullah except Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge, but they were a group as Allah said. It is said that the one who carried most of the slander was Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul.” Urwa added, “Aisha disliked to have Hassan abused in her presence and she used to say, ‘It was he who said: My father and his (my father’s) father and my honor are all for the protection of Muhammad’s honor from you.” Aisha added, “After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers while I was unaware of anything of all that, but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah’s Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. But now Allah’s Messenger would only come, greet me and say,’ How is that lady? and leave. That roused my doubts, but I did not discover the evil slander till I went out after my convalescence, I went out with Um Mistah to Al-Manasi where we used to answer the call of nature, and we used not to go out to answer the call of nature except at night, and that was before we had latrines near our houses. And this habit of our concerning evacuating the bowels, was similar to the habits of the old ‘Arabs living in the deserts, for it would be troublesome for us to take latrines near our houses. So, I and Um Mistah who was the daughter of Abu Ruhm bin Al-Muttalib bin `Abd Manaf, whose mother was the daughter of Sakhr bin Amir and the aunt of Abu Bakr As-Siddiq and whose son was Mistah bin Uthatha bin Abbas bin Al-Muttalib, went out. I and Um Mistah returned to my house after we finished answering the call of nature. Um Mistah stumbled by getting her foot entangled in her covering sheet and on that she said, ‘Let Mistah be ruined!’ I said, ‘What a hard word you have said. Do you abuse a man who took part in the battle of Badr?’ On that she said, ‘O you Hantah! Didn’t you hear what Mistah said? ‘I said, ‘What did he say?’ Then she told me the slander of the people of Ifk. So, my ailment was aggravated, and when I reached my home, Allah’s Messenger came to me, and after greeting me, said, ‘How is that lady? I said, ‘Will you allow me to go to my parents?’ as I wanted to be sure about the news through them. Allah’s Apostle allowed me and I went to my parents and asked my mother, ‘O mother! What are the people talking about?’ She said, ‘O my daughter! Don’t worry, for scarcely is there a charming woman who is loved by her husband and whose husband has other wives besides herself that they would find faults with her.’ I said, ‘Subhan-Allah! (I testify the uniqueness of Allah). Are the people really talking in this way?’ I kept on weeping that night till dawn I could neither stop weeping nor sleep then in the morning again, I kept on weeping. When the Divine Inspiration was delayed. Allah’s Messenger called Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me. Usama bin Zaid said what he knew of my innocence, and the respect he preserved in himself for me. Usama said, O Allah’s Messenger! She is your wife and we do not know anything except good about her. Ali bin Abi Talib said, O Allah’s Messenger! Allah does not put you in difficulty and there are plenty of women other than she, yet, ask the maid-servant who will tell you the truth. On that Allah’s Messenger called Barira (the maid-servant) and said, ‘O Barira! Did you ever see anything which aroused your suspicion?’ Barira said to him, ‘By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.’ So, on that day, Allah’s Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ‘O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family? By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.’ Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.’ On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d bin Mu`adh. ‘By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.’ On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d bin Mu`adh got up and said to Sa`d bin ‘Ubada, ‘By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.’ On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah’s Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah’s Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. All that day I kept on weeping with my tears never ceasing, and I could never sleep. In the morning, my parents were with me and I wept for two nights and a day with my tears never ceasing and I could never sleep till I thought that my liver would burst from weeping. So, while my parents were sitting with me and I was weeping, an Ansari woman asked me to grant her admittance. I allowed her to come in, and when she came in, she sat down and started weeping with me. While we were in this state, Allah’s Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case. Allah’s Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, ‘Amma Badu, O Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance. When Allah’s Messenger finished his speech, my tears ceased flowing completely that I no longer felt a single drop of tear flowing. I said to my father, ‘Reply to Allah’s Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.’ My father said, ‘By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah’s Messenger.’ Then I said to my mother, ‘Reply to Allah’s Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.’ She said, ‘By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah’s Messenger.’ In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur’an, I said, ‘By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this slanderous speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me. By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph’s father when he said, ‘For me patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah Alone Whose Help can be sought.’ Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed; and Allah knew then that I was innocent and hoped that Allah would reveal my innocence. But, by Allah, I never thought that Allah would reveal about my case, Divine Inspiration, that would be recited forever as I considered myself too unworthy to be talked of by Allah with something of my concern, but I hoped that Allah’s Messenger might have a dream in which Allah would prove my innocence. But, by Allah, before Allah’s Messenger left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah’s Messenger. So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him, when he used to be inspired Divinely. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah’s Messenger was over, he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, ‘O Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!’ Then my Mother said to me, ‘Get up and go to Allah’s Messenger. I replied, ‘By Allah, I will not go to him, and I praise none but Allah. So, Allah revealed the ten Verses: “Verily! They who spread the slander Are a gang, among you.” Allah revealed those Qur’anic Verses to declare my innocence. Abu Bakr As-Siddiq who used to disburse money for Mistah bin Uthatha because of his relationship to him and his poverty, said, ‘By Allah, I will never give to Mistah bin Uthatha anything after what he has said about Aisha.’ Then Allah revealed: “And let not those among you who are good and wealthy swear not to give any sort of help to their kinsmen, those in need, and those who have left their homes for Allah’s cause, let them pardon and forgive. Do you not love that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is oft-Forgiving Most Merciful.” Abu Bakr As-Siddiq said, ‘Yes, by Allah, I would like that Allah forgive me.’ and went on giving Mistah the money he used to give him before. He also added, ‘By Allah, I will never deprive him of it at all.’ Aisha further said: ” Allah’s Messenger also asked Zainab bint Jahsh (his wife) about my case. He said to Zainab, ‘What do you know and what did you see?” She replied, “O Allah’s Messenger! I refrain from claiming falsely that I have heard or seen anything. By Allah, I know nothing except good about Aisha. From amongst the wives of the Prophet Zainab was my peer, in beauty and in the love she received from the Prophet, but Allah saved her from that evil because of her piety. Her sister Hamna, started struggling on her behalf and she was destroyed along with those who were destroyed. The man who was blamed said, ‘Subhan-Allah! By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, I have never uncovered the cover (veil) of any female.’ Later on the man was martyred in Allah’s Cause.”

As well, we have the decrees and threats of Islam to reinforce the words of Allah as given through his prophet.

An-Nur 24:13: “Why did they who slandered not produce for it four witnesses? And when they do not produce the witnesses, then it is they, in the sight of Allah, who are the liars.”

An-Nur 24:4: “And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses – lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient.”

It was thus the matter of the necessity of the ‘four witnesses’ was established. We must address this matter again later, as to show how the ‘four witnesses’ only further served to aggravate the plight of women for justice.

Incestuous Rape in Islam

It is not permissible to accuse a father or immediate male family member of rape without the same evidence required for non-incestuous rape. The sharia places the same conditions of confession by the transgressor or testimony of four trustworthy men. Statements by a girl, woman or her mother are valueless and the accused simply should not have been taken to court. This is a ‘Catch 22 Situation’ which essentially gives a free license to sexual predators and child molesters.

And, to think the victims may somehow escape this through divorcing the perpetrator of incest upon their child truly opens up another bag of Islamic sharia snakes. You see, in spite of all the evidence to validate the talaq male positioning by Allah, a misinterpretation of his written word purports that he also gave the exclusive male right of talaq to the wife so she too can exercise it to divorce her husband. This truly is an absurdity. So, I must now take you along the slithery pathway of Islamic divorce and remarriage so Canada will not be further poisoned by the snake called sharia.

Divorce and Remarriage

A wife can easily be divorced and replaced under Islam, so watch how you behave ladies. The description of the ‘better wife’ that your male master will potentially receive is the woman he desires you to be, as Muhammad warns wives in At-Tahrim 66:5: “Maybe, his Lord, if he divorce you, will give him in your place wives better than you, submissive, faithful, obedient, penitent, adorers, fasters, widows and virgins” As usual, at the head of such lists is female submission.

Under Islam all that is required for a husband to divorce his wife is to orally utter “talaq”. This essential statement is basically translated to English as “I divorce thee’. To enact talaq, all a Muslim husband needs do is to unequivocally state this action of divorcing his wife. And he must in no unrighteous manner take back from the dowry he paid for her.

An-Nur 4:19-20: “O you who have believed, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by compulsion. And do not make difficulties for them in order to take back part of what you gave them unless they commit a clear immorality. And live with them in kindness. For if you dislike them – perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good. But if you want to replace one wife with another and you have given one of them a great amount in gifts, do not take back from it anything. Would you take it in injustice and manifest sin?”

Now, in accordance with traditional Muslim law, a talaq can also be pronounced using an agent or can be done in writing. Thus, the woman is like a disposable piece of purchased merchandise that a man can divorce for a reason or for no reason and at any time he desires. The only conditions Allah places upon him is that he takes nothing back from the dower he originally gave to obtain her as his wife; and, then he must abstain from sexual intimacy with his wife for the applicable period of iddah, after which the divorce is completed as a matter of legal Islamic male right. No court orders are needed, followed or required. This Islamic doctrine leads to many abuses of the marriage institution and human rights issues as understood in Canada.

The basic instructions surrounding divorce and some particular aspects or affects it can have in individual cases is found in At-Talaq 65:1-6.

“O Prophet, when you Muslims divorce women, divorce them from the commencement of their waiting period and keep count of the waiting period, and fear Allah, your Lord. Do not turn them out of their husbands’ houses, nor should they themselves leave during that period unless they are committing a clear immorality. And those are the limits set by Allah. And whoever transgresses the limits of Allah has certainly wronged himself. You know not; perhaps Allah will bring about after that a different matter.” “And when they have nearly fulfilled their term, either retain them according to acceptable terms or part with them according to acceptable terms. And bring to witness two just men from among you and establish the testimony for the acceptance of Allah. That is instructed to whoever should believe in Allah and the Last day. And whoever fears Allah – He will make for him a way out.” “And will provide for him from where he does not expect. And whoever relies upon Allah – then He is sufficient for him. Indeed, Allah will accomplish His purpose. Allah has already set for everything a decreed extent.” “And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women – if you doubt, then their period is three months, and also for those who have not menstruated. And for those who are pregnant, their term is until they give birth. And whoever fears Allah – He will make for him of his matter ease.” “That is the command of Allah, which He has sent down to you; and whoever fears Allah – He will remove for him his misdeeds and make great for him his reward.” “Lodge them in a section of where you dwell out of your means and do not harm them in order to oppress them. And if they should be pregnant, then spend on them until they give birth. And if they breastfeed for you, then give them their payment and confer among yourselves in the acceptable way; but if you are in discord, then there may breastfeed for the father another woman.”

But, as the expression has been spoken: ‘the Devil is in the Details’, for according to the written law of Allah, no matter what, a Muslim man still remains with the simple right to add or replace one wife with another at will as has been stated. And there are three levels (stages) of marriage enactment when talaq can be employed by the male. All three have variant rules surrounding them but it is stated by some that in the third talaq (stage) that the divorce is irrevocable. It appears that in the old Islamic ball game of marriage three strikes of the talaq and you are out. It is then back in the dugout no matter how foul the mans balls may be.

But, through societal evolution some sectarian varieties of Muslim law have added additional rules to try to make their laws on marriage and divorce appear as more merciful and reasonable, attempting to pass them off as the true teachings of Islam which is a blatant lie. For example, some Muslim governments have enacted laws that require a husband to seek permission from his wife before marrying another and there absolutely is no such stipulation clause in the Qur’an or hadith. The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked about this and replied as follows: “The first wife’s consent is not a prerequisite for a man to take another wife. It is not obligatory for the husband, if he wants to take a second wife, to have the consent of his first wife, but it is good manners and kindness to deal with her in such a manner that will minimize the hurt feelings such thing might produce.”

For certain it is time to end the reinventing of a religion based on the feelings of Westernized Muslims and calling it “Islam”. It must be accepted for what the Qur’an and hadith show it to truly be. And what they show Islam to be is not suitable for any sane man to endorse.

Does this not register with you? In Islamic law, the husband clearly has the exclusive right to talaq as the termination of marriage. Talaq is defined as a unilateral act, which can only take legal effect through the husband’s declaration. Neither grounds for divorce, nor the wife’s presence or her consent are necessary. With no children involved, necessity basically remains but ensuring the payment of the mahr (dowry) and nafaqa (maintenance) during the iddah period (three menses after the declaration).

The Three Talaqs

There are three divorces that a Muslim marriage can undergo at which the talaq utterance only granted the male needs to be spoken individually. But sectors of Islam have initiated a doctrine of stating ‘I divorce thee’ in immediate sequence. Or, they state ‘I divorce thee three times’ as one statement. No matter which form of statement, they believe this is justified by Allah and fast-forwards them directly to stage three divorce where they can deal with matters as they have thought most desirable.

As with many other Islamic doctrinal interpretations there is great confusion among the sectors of Islam and a battle has raged worldwide surrounding this jump-start direct to stage three. The scrap is still taking place between the leadership of the variant branches of Islamic belief, and women’s rights groups have thrust themselves into the fray as well. It appears many of the women involved have some degree of enlightenment as to Qur’an and hadith surrounding the male obligation to dowry matters and family provision. Along with them are others who are simply justifiable social activists and a variant range of feminists. At times, however, the loudest voices are reflective of what we tend to classify as your rabid North American style feminist and/or lesbian adherents that have wormed their way into all women’s issues. This crew is battling with different levels of government within and without Islamic nations to prevent or rescind the ‘Three-In-One-Talaq’ doctrine and to enshrine what they perceive as women’s rights.

The Traditional Talaq Stages to Islamic Divorce

Divorce One: A man enacts divorce the first time. Then the man and the wife are to separate their ways. The woman spends her Iddah period of approximately 3-4 months. After the 3-4 months, the man and woman remarry for the second time.

Divorce Two: A man divorces the same woman for the second time. Again, the man and wife are to separate their ways. Subsequent to her period of the iddah following the man and woman express desire to marry a third time.

Divorce Three: From the marriage following divorce two the man decides he wants to divorce again and he crows his third talaq. And, it is following this divorce that the fullness of the Islamic debacle called marriage comes into greater focus.

Buddy now decides he still wants another go at woman. Sectors of Islam state that even if buddy wants another run at his dubious bride after her iddah he cannot do so without being disobedient to Allah. Claim is spoken that in Al-Baqarah 2:229-30 the base has been set that divorce and remarriage can only take place twice before the marriage is permanently unlawful through the third talaq. This side of the dugout states the man and woman cannot play ball together again. But there are two teams in the Islamic dugout of Hell.

Al-Baqarah 2:229-30: “Divorce is twice. Then, either keep her in an acceptable manner or release her with good treatment. And it is not lawful for you to take anything of what you have given them unless both fear that they will not be able to keep within the limits of Allah. But if you fear that they will not keep within the limits of Allah, then there is no blame upon either of them concerning that by which she ransoms herself. These are the limits of Allah, so do not transgress them. And whoever transgresses the limits of Allah – it is those who are the wrongdoers.” The term ‘by which she ransoms herself’ has fomented great spiritual battle which we shall be dealing with.

And the Islamic Sharia Court of the United Kingdom appears in basic agreement with Zakir Naik, but it differs in stating that “Where a man has pronounced three divorces, on three different occasions, he can neither take back his former wife, nor remarry her.” and “The man is required to pay the dower amount in full to the woman.” > TALAQ | Islamic Sharia

If you can avoid ‘bunny trail research’ and desire immediate link to a topical reference to all matters Islamic along with surah you will probably find this site very useful. >Divorce – islamic

And now back to Three Talaqs where this link > Should India review Muslim divorce?takes you to the land where Trudeau likes to dance and recruit his military leadership from. It appears India is where the “Battle of the Three-In-One-Talaq” is still roaring the loudest.

There is nothing in the Surah Al-Baqarah that directly supports the claim to the legitimacy of making three statements of talaq as the pronouncement- of three divorcements in a single breath. There is however statement in the hadith that people did start making this mistake during Muhammad’s lifetime.

Sahih Muslim 9:3493: “Abu al-Sahba said to Ibn Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces pronounced at one and the same time were not treated as one during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger. And Abu Bakr said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of Umar people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he (Umar) allowed them to do so, to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one.”

It is also stated that the twelve verses of Surah At Talaq: 65 are the instructions Allah set down to correct the mistakes people were making surrounding divorce as first given in the commandments of Surah Al-Baqarah. There is nothing in Surah At Talaq: 65 that supports the idea of ‘three divorces in a single breath as one’ either. Because people started to fall into error and practiced what appears blatant heretical doctrine does not validate something claimed to be above the word of Allah or his prophet.

And, how Allah and his prophet deals with the third talaq divorce, while quite ludicrous, is very clearly stated.

Al-Baqarah 2:230 “And if he has divorced her for the third time, then she is not lawful to him afterward until after she marries a husband other than him. And if the latter husband divorces her, or dies, there is no blame upon the woman and her former husband for returning to each other if they think that they can keep within the limits of Allah. These are the limits of Allah which He makes clear to a people who know.”

Allah only permits a reunification if she follows the Qur’ans steps of marrying someone else, consummating that marriage, and then is divorced by the second husband. The woman is forced to engage in sexual intercourse with a total stranger on her way back to a possible reunion with her first husband.

The requirement is not symbolic and Muhammad was very clear that any interim marriage between divorces must be consummated as evidenced in Sahih al-Bukhari 63:190: “Narrated ‘Aisha: A man divorced his wife and she married another man who proved to be impotent and divorced her. She could not get her satisfaction from him, and after a while he divorced her. Then she came to the Prophet and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! My first husband divorced me and then I married another man who entered upon me to consummate his marriage but he proved to be impotent and did not approach me except once during which he benefited nothing from me. Can I remarry my first husband in this case?” Allah’s Apostle said, “It is unlawful to marry your first husband till the other husband consummates his marriage with you.”

Abu Dawud 2302 as well confirms this matter of necessary consummation of sexual relations following talaq three. “Narrated by ‘Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: The Apostle of Allah was asked about a man who divorced his wife three times, and she married another who entered upon her, but divorced her before having intercourse with her, whether she was lawful for the former husband. She said: The Prophet replied: She is not lawful for the first husband until she tastes the honey of the other husband and he tastes her honey.”

A pretty sticky theological mess, one screwed up from beginning to end.

DIVIDING LINES

In the world of Islam, separationbetween the spouses can only be done in one of two major ways: talaq (divorce) or faskh (annulment). The major difference between them is that talaq is the ending of the marital relationship by the instigation of the husband alone, involving specific well-known phrases. It is important to note that the man can authorize another person to act as his agent of talaq. For under this agency sector has emerged the disputed doctrine of Tafweedh.

In moving onward, we thus need to ensure the following terminology are being related to through these basic Arab-Islamic definitions.

Tafwid (Tafweedh) means delegation and this doctrine purports to allow the male to give his agency right of talaq even to his wife to execute. In effect, this supposedly permits her to choose the manner or process of divorce she will undergo in the Islamic arena called faskh.

In the context of Islamic personal status law the terms Tafweedh-e-talaq or Tafwid al-talaq refer toa type of talaq in which the power of initiating the divorce is delegated to the wife through her entering into khul. This delegation supposedly occurs because the husband employs an agent in his marriage transactions. The use of an agent can be made at the time of drawing up the marriage contract or during the marriage, with or without conditions. Most of the modern Muslim-majority countries permit this type of divorce in some form. This doctrine is spoken to at length under khul.

Mahr means dower (dowry) and is an agreed upon compensation for the wife that is obligatory on the husband before the act of intercourse occurs. In cases of Islamic divorce jurisprudence surrounding dowry there is clear guidance depending on who asks for the divorce and whether or not the intercourse occurred. To exemplify, If the husband issues talaq and intercourse has occurred he pays full mahr. If the husband speaks talaq before intercourse occurs, he still pays half the dowry.

The dowry disposal can be affected by other financial obligations depending on the length of marriage, if any children are involved and their ages and the property that they may hold together. However, unlike most Western laws where the couple split assets earned during the marriage, Islamic law does not entitle the wife to a split of the husband’s assets at divorce

‎ In the case of an agreed to separation under khul the dowryis repaid by the wife to the husband, but the amount he demands may be far greater than what he paid for her. In most other situations of annulment (faskh) any outstanding Mehr must be paid to the wife.

Iddah (iddat) in Islam is the period a woman must observe after a divorce or the death of her spouse, during which she may not marry another man. Its main purpose is to ensure that she is not pregnant, or if pregnant to determine that the male parent of any offspring produced after the cessation of her marriage (nikah) will be known.

There are variables such as sporadic-irregular menstruation and menopause that are taken into consideration and have rulings. But Allah has stated: al-Baqarah 227-228: “And if they decide upon divorce, then Allâh is All-Hearer and All-Knower. Divorced women shall wait (as regards their marriage) for three menstrual periods, and it is not lawful for them to conceal what Allâh has created in their wombs, if they believe in Allâh and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And the women have rights over their husbands as regards living expenses, similar to those of their husbands over them as regards obedience and respect to what is reasonable, but men have a degree of responsibility over them. And Allâh is All-Mighty, All-Wise.”

Biddah (bid’ah) in English refers to innovation. In Islam, the root of the word means initiating something without any precedent. In the terminology of sharia, it means something that has been introduced into the religion of Allah that has no general or specific basis to support it. It is heresy, and for large sectors of Islam many of the doctrines espoused under khul are heresy.

Khul – A Case of This or That?

Khul, Khula or Al-Khulreferences a situation where the husband and wife come to an agreement between themselves that the husband will grant talaq(Islamic divorce) upon the wife repaying the Islamic dowry (Mehr)payable to the wife upon marriage to the husband. There is supposedly to be no allegation of fault necessarily given.

The method of separation known as khul has been evident in Islam for over 1400 years now and does not appear to always have been practiced according to the Qur’an. While the method is supposed to be a non-fault divorce or annulment granting separation between a married couple without attributing blame, it has evolved to necessity of using a claim of some irretrievable breakdown as being the sole grounds. Why? Because once khul is embarked upon by the wife, if she does not get her desired agreement then she must next move forward to faskh which is the Islamic system of annulment that evolved under the qadis (judges). Islamic scholars continue to differ as to whether khul format is a faskh (an annulment) or a talaq (a divorce). To settle several matters surrounding the mess called Islamic marriage and divorce we need to look at a bit of ‘historical Islamic legal development’.

The qadis, the courts and the faskh.

Since the time of Muhammad, the qadi (judge) has remained the key person supposedly ensuring the establishment of justice on the basis of the very laws of the Qur’an and rules displayed through hadith. Thus, a qadi was chosen from amongst those who had mastered the study of Islamic jurisprudence and law. In constructing legal doctrine, these legal scholars took as their point of departure the precedents already established by the qadis before them. And all of their ‘rulings’ were thus ultimately supposed to rest upon the words of Allah and his prophet Muhammad. And, through the evolution of the Islamic jurisprudence the qadis came to hold a power to apply the law as only the supreme ruler as head of the state is to be able to apply and could guarantee.

The primary responsibility of a qadi is a judicial one but evolved to encompass certain non-judicial functions such as the administration of religious endowments (waqfs), the legitimization of the accession or deposition of a ruler, the execution of wills, the accreditation of witnesses, guardianship over people in need of protection such as orphans and supervision of the enforcement of public morals (ḥisbah).

To qualify as a qadi you must be a free adult Muslim considered to be sane and educated in Islamic science. You may never have been convicted of slander and you must be able to bring judgements totally congruent with Sharia free of using your own interpretation. You are required to exercise your duties in an accessible public place such as the chief masjid or your personal residence.

There are many rules governing the qadis but the ranks were not always morally nor legally kept clean. The qadis have long been complained about and frequently considered corrupted through their management of religious endowments. Whatever, In the trial in front of a qadi the plaintiff is responsible for bringing evidence against the defendant in order to have him or her convicted. There are no appeals to the judgements given by a qadi and the position does wield a lot of power over peoples lives.

Of particular note is the qadi has the power either to compel the husband to pronounce talaq or to assume his authority and pronounce it on his behalf. They claim this has come to them through the males right to use an agent in talaq and the doorway of khul available to women and its doctrines. Whatever, if they exercise such authority of talaq the qadi is enacting what can essentially be considered a compulsory issue of divorce by annulment.

Mubarat, for lack of a better translatable term has mistakenly been referred to as “divorce by mutual consent” which has caused even greater confusion for Canadians in trying to deal with Islamic demands to their right for sharia within our nation. Mubaratactually refers to an assumption that both marriage partners are in a state of desiring annulment because they have not agreed under khul to the wife’s request for talaq.

Through failing to secure her husband’s consent under khul her final recourse is to seek the intervention of a mediating third party, such as an imam; and then moving onward to a judge (qadi) functioning under mubarat which entails automatically the assumption that both parties dislike their marriage.

It is believed that the qadi or Islamic Sharia court judge can grant a talaq if it was first requested under the process of khul and that they can do this without the husband’s consent. When petition for khul is taken to the Sharia courts, a judge is permitted to substitute himself as the husband and annul the marriage. This process of judicial annulment is also commonly referred to as faskh, and typically evolves after the husband does not agree to his wife’s request under khul.

Faskh is annulment of the marriage contract and dissolution of the marital bond obligations. And it is under khul and mubarat that the doctrinal side of the Islamic Court systems you hear evoked as the Islamic Sharia Councils and Islamic Community Courts has evolved. They bring about judgments in disputes between members of the Islamic community. And, unfortunately when they come to faskh (annulment) they have taken an agency upon themselves as enabling the husband’s enactment of talaq that they have no right to in the Qur’an.

A quantum leap through the process of arbitration.

Khul is legalized by verses of Qur’an and events of the Sunnah of the Prophet. The claim is made that Qur’an expressly sanctioned redemption (khul) and its process through Al-Baqarah 2:229 “Divorce is twice. Then, either keep her in an acceptable manner or release her with good treatment. And it is not lawful for you to take anything of what you have given them unless both fear that they will not be able to keep within the limits of Allah. But if you fear that they will not keep within the limits of Allah, then there is no blame upon either of them concerning that by which she ransoms herself. These are the limits of Allah, so do not transgress them. And whoever transgresses the limits of Allah, it is those who are the wrongdoers.”

The phrase but if you fear that they will not keep within the limits of Allah, is ground zero for the qadi claiming the right to force the husband to issue talaq or to do so in his stead.

And the phrase there is no blame upon either of them concerning that by which she ransoms herself is supposed to underpin their belief that through khul the woman gained agency of talaq.

We first look at ‘if you fear’ as some question whether it is the judges or the spouses that are being addressed. It is one or the other will determine whether the two partners can, or cannot, live within the bounds set by Allah. Thus, the question is absolute stupidity for the mere fact the spouses have evolved to the point of process of mediation shows one or both cannot keep within the bounds of Allah. The ‘if you fear’ is clearly directed toward the imam or judges involved to this stage for Ayat an-Nisan 4:35 states:

“And if you fear dissension between the two, send an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they both desire reconciliation, Allah will cause it between them. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Acquainted with all things.”

So, arbitrators have been appointed and now is where a quantum leap of assumption occurs if there is refusal to stay as husband and wife.

“The arbitrators chosen by the judge should see who is the cause of discord and once this is established they should dissolve the marriage through redemption (khul) if the cause is the husband.” And if “the arbitrators considered it appropriate to decree separation they may decree separation. And a decree of separation by the arbitrators is binding for the spouses. And this is so whether their decree coincided with or was against the decree of the local court and whether the spouses delegated them the authority to do so or not”. Muhammad Ifzaal Mehmood – International Islamic University Malaysia.

So, we have a believed circumstance by many that not only can a qadi or imam enact talaq on the part of the husband, but the arbitrator’s can as well.

Because a husband may employ an agent to act in his behalf in the issue of khul does not automatically transfer this right to arbitrators, imams, qadis or anyone else because his wife moves onward through khul to a mediator and then onward to them. To be his initial agent, the husband has to request a party to be his agent and to cede his authority to him. And, further no where does Allah state that under khul he has granted talaq to the wife. She can in no manner either enact talaq or request an agent on her behalf to do so.

Both the reasons given for enacting faskh (annulment) and the methods employed for such annulment, register as apostasy from Islam. Khul is to entail a no one at fault agreement, but faskhcan only be employed when there is absolutely a reason that makes it necessary or permissible. In other words, someone has to be at fault and the judges have granted faskh for a number of reasons such as conversion by one party to Islam and the other party’s refusal to follow suit. The presence of a defect in either spouse that prevents intimacy or creates revulsion between them has also been found to be suitable cause for faskh. Or, matters surrounding financial difficulties and dower can be entailed. None of these reasons for faskh registers in my thinking as “khul no fault divorce by mutual consent”, but rather as “potential grounds for annulment (faskh)” because one party or the other is clearly at fault.

In the contemporary Muslim world, the process of faskh has become the common juristic basis on which a Muslim woman can obtain a ‘court divorce’. But the contemporary Muslim world is not solidly planted in the Qur’an or hadith, and there are many different schools of Islamic law, and practices of faskh varies in different countries. The doctrines of khul and faskh have thus become two spiritually leprous and shaky legs that Islam stands upon and kicks at the rest of the world with in horrendous evil and anger.

The key thing in the fight about faskh and its form of marriage dissolution remains the claim that it does not require the husband’s utterance, his choice or his personal consent. And, thus faskh can be done by means of the verdict of a qadi (judge) or a Qur’an sharia ruling. But, talaq is the husband’s right, and it is not dependent upon the ruling of a qadi (judge), even though talaq may still occur by mutual consent between the spouses, if the husband agrees during the process of khul initiated by the wife. And if he does agree khul still is not talaq divorce but an annulment under Islamic law.

And this brings us somewhat to the phrase ‘there is no blame upon either of them concerning that by which she ransoms herself’ that is supposed to underpin their belief that through khul the woman gained agency of talaq.

For certain khul does entail a woman’s right to directly approach her husband or his agent to be freed from him. But, nowhere does Islam allow a wife to be released from marriage obligations without her husband’s consent. However, she can buy her release by offering him compensation under khul. Having been bought by him into marriage through dowry it is her attempt to buy her way back out. And there is no ceiling on the amount of compensation that she might have to pay to be granted it. Money is at the forefront here and you must take into account that under Islam women have been traditionally bought and sold. In functioning under khul she still remains a part of the commodities market at best.

The term khul literally means redemption or “extracting oneself” and is the action of the husband accepting compensation from the wife in exchange for her relief from their marital ties. Compensation is paid by the wife for obtaining her annulment. Khul when thus enacted, is basically only a ‘legal circumstance’ in which the wife no longer has to submit to her husband sexually nor co-habit in any form, and in its most simplistic format he has no further legal obligation to financially provide for her. But, no matter how they precede, the spouses do not have the right to agree to simply annul the marriage without the compensation matter surrounding dowry being publicly taken care of.

And now, even more directly to the phrase ‘there is no blame upon either of them concerning that by which she ransoms herself’. This phrase is supposed to underpin their belief that through khul the woman gained agency of talaq. Being stated is, there simply is no sin on the part of the husband to receive compensation when his wife wants to participate in khul with him, and no sin on her part for desiring khul and wanting to make such payment. There is no implication of transfer of his right of talaq to her agency.

But other verses are quickly reeled in to further muddy the waters of claimed female right to issue talaq. It is purported that Qur’an 33:35 states the full equality of true believers and thus extends the true believing wife entitlement to talaq.

Al-Hazab 33:35: “Indeed, the Muslim men and Muslim women, the believing men and believing women, the obedient men and obedient women, the truthful men and truthful women, the patient men and patient women, the humble men and humble women, the charitable men and charitable women, the fasting men and fasting women, the men who guard their private parts and the women who do so, and the men who remember Allah often and the women who do so, for them Allah has prepared forgiveness and a great reward.”

The Quran, in addressing the believers, as both possess souls, often uses the expression, ‘believing men and women’ to emphasize the equality of men and women in regard to their respective duties, rights, virtues and merits. Both are promised the same reward for good conduct and the same punishment for evil conduct in their individual roles as defined by Allah. None of this even implies that women can also make a declaration of talaq as does the male.

Again, as stated in An-Nisa 4:128: “And if a woman fears from her husband contempt or evasion, there is no sin upon them if they make terms of settlement between them, and settlement is best. And present in human souls is stinginess. But if you do good and fear Allah, then indeed Allah is ever Acquainted with what you do.”

This verse does give authority to enter into khul and states it is best to reach terms of settlement which are good with Allah and that neither should be stingy in dealing with one another.

If a wife believes her husband is trying to avoid his duties toward her and acting contemptuously toward her she is allowed to forfeit all or part of her rights, such as provisions, clothing, dwellings and so forth and the husband is allowed to accept such concessions from her. Hence, there is no harm if she offers such concessions, and if her husband accepts them. That by which she ransoms herself is the agreed to compensation and simply means she is the one that is making the payment, and the agent of her redemption (buying back) through her action. It in no way can be construed that she is issuing talaq. She is simply fulfilling khul under which at this stage does not in any manner mean she is issuing talaq.

And to draw in the history of the hadith to support an erroneous belief that a woman can issue talaq remains futile dissertation. But the argument is endless, and never will end as opponents in the matter will never admit it is they who are wrong. Only the miracle presence of Jesus Christ will ever get them to pull of their mask and know freedom from their bondage and sin.

Think about it, if the spouses were both fearing that they could not live up to Islam as required by Allah there would have been agreement under the first approach by the wife and there would never have occurred arbitration or any of the rest of the ill-founded mess. It is blatantly obvious from examples called upon that unless talaq occurs at first entry to khul, that one or other, or perhaps both are not agreeing with Allah that ‘settlement is best’. When you are not in agreement with Allah by your actions you are in a state of apostasy under Islam.

With no Qur’an to support their transfer talaq such expositors still seek hadith to try and base themselves upon.

And, their favorite story used to reference khul and serve as the basis for at odds legal frays of their legal interpretations is an episode during the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad. This occurred when he was approached by the wife of a companion of his for a ruling. The event from the Islamic legal history surrounding the case of Thabit ibn Qais Habibah bin Sahl has several conflicting hadith surround the incident. Even if there were not conflicting reports, no independent situation from the hadith standing on its own through such historical recording can overrule the Qur’an. Islamic Jurists simply choose to follow the hadith of their desire and continue to ignore this fact, or they are bound into the deepest of deceptions according to Islam.

First there are hadith reports that the wife of Thabit made no statement of fault.

“The wife of Thabit ibn Qays came to the Prophet and said, “O Messenger of Allah, I do not reproach Thabit ibn Qays in respect of character and religion, but I do not want to be guilty of showing anger to him.” (Her meaning was that although Thabit was a good man, she was unable to get along with him and thus might not be able to show him the respect due to a husband.) The Prophet asked her about what she had received from him. She replied, “A garden.” He asked, “Will you give him back his garden?” “Yes,” she said. The Prophet then told Thabit, “Accept the garden and make one declaration of divorce.” (Reported in al-Bukhari and an-Nasa’i)

Here the wife of Thabit ibn Qays asked the Prophet’s advice saying that she could not find any defects in Thabit’s character or religion but simply could not endure to live with him because she might not be able to show him the respect due a husband. Thabit bin Qays then divorced her.

She said that she could find no personal defects in her husband’s character nor his practices of Islam, so there is no presentation of his violating Islam. Thus, her statement satisfies the doctrine of khul where there is no attachment of blame and the matter of dowry and compensation is publicly handled. When Muhammad saw that the doctrine of khul was being enacted properly he told Thabit to divorce her and this was a divorce one talaq circumstance.

But other hadith surrounding this incident show her making clear statements of fault.

And, under the process (mubarat) of faskh there has to be clear evidence of irretrievable breakdown. “It is not permissible for woman to seek divorce from her husband unless she has borne ill-treatment from him or unless she has an acceptable reason which requires their separation. Said the Prophet, “If any woman asks her husband for a divorce without some strong reason, the fragrance of the Garden will be forbidden to her.” (Reported by Abu Dawud)”

So, in her approach through khul to seek divorce she had to have some strong reason for wanting the separation and thus she had to be in effect lying somewhere as these conflicting hadith show.

It is stated she hated the physical ugliness of her husband. “She presented her case to the Messenger of Allah in the following words: “O Messenger of Allah! Nothing can ever unite his head with mine. When I raised my veil I saw him coming in the company of a few men and he was the darkest, shortest and ugliest of them. By God I do not dislike him because of any defect in his faith or morality. I just hate his ugly looks. By God! If I did not fear Allah, I would have spat on his face when he came near me.”

And, Bukhari and Nasai state: “I do not find any fault in his faith or morality”. It denotes that she was satisfied regarding his piousness but she doesn’t like his physical appearance. The Prophet heard that complaint and observed; “will you return him the garden which he has given to you”. She then answered; “O‘ yes, Messenger of Allah! I shall give even more if he wants”. “No, not more. Just return him his garden”, observed the messenger of Allah. He then ordered: Thabit, accept the garden and give her a divorce.”

Sunan Abu Dawud 2220 reports the case differently: “Aisha, the Prophet’s wife, relates that Habibah bint Sahl was married to Thabit b. Qays b. Shamas, who hit her and broke a limb of hers. She approached the Prophet after dawn, and he summoned Thabit and told him: “Take (khul) some of her money and separate from her.” Thabit said: “Is this permissible, Prophet of Allah?” The Prophet said: “Yes”. Thabit said: “I gave her two gardens as dower and they are her property.” The Prophet said: ‘Take them and separate from her ‘, which he did”.

Broken limbs, a greater number of gardens and perhaps in the background somewhere Thabit is smiling to himself and singing ‘I never promised you a rose garden’, eh? After all, this is just divorce one and under Islam he can still get another crack at the cat. In fact, it is his right to take her back if he desires. Time for a Muslim Blabbit Thabit song break as he starts another round of Muslim Marriage Madness.

Anyways, old ‘Grabit-Thabit’ may have been the holiest of Muslim husbands or the ugliest and worst of beasts, but these hadith can in no manner support “ransom herself’ as entailing anything implies she now as well could exercise talaq. Find a clear example given in the Qur’an, the words of Allah, showing transfer of the male right of talaq to the wife due to irretrievable breakdown? They are not to be found.

Yet on the basis of all this there is claim stated for right to usurp and/or transfer talaq. They state that because Muhammad instructed the man Thabit to separate from his honey bunny, that he was a totally passive party in the transaction, and thus a husband’s consent is not required in talaq.

To sum up their claim: Allah says talaq is the unilateral right of the man and can only be given by him. (correct) The Qur’an/hadith also show that a man can employ an agent in his behalf to enact talaq. (correct) And, it is under khul where a wife does not get her agreement for separation that the quad (judge) may then be approached to enact faskh (correct). Because the Qur’an and doctrine of khul both recognize the male right to employment of agency, when he employs an agent, it is acknowledged by both Qur’an and khul that he has agreed to transfer his power of talaq. (absolutely wrong) If he has used an agent during khul, some sectors of Islam claim the wife now automatically also has the same agency status of talaq, and this is known as Tafweedh-e-Talaq. (absolutely wrong)

In our khul case of ‘this or that’ the authority for such transfer to the wife is non-existent, sitting on fraudulent grounds that evolved through Muslim interjections of their own erroneous interpretations of mainly a singular phrase taken out of context. From this and basically unrelated reference from the hadith they continue to interjected their own distorted ideas based upon the precedents of their forefathers. This all is an overriding of Allah and his prophet. Here is a taste of just how their minds work. How Can a Muslim Wife obtain Divorce from her Husband?

But, to claim the hadith to back up an erroneous claim to what Allah and the prophet has stated places one and all in the position of blasphemers, hypocrites and liars demanding their repentance. The khul-faskh fiasco all perches upon rotting branches of transferring the power of talaq. The qadi has no right to take the authority of husband upon himself nor is it the right of the woman to exercise talaq in the same capacity as her husband. As for faskh, it depends upon the verdict of a qadi. And quite bluntly, the arena of the qadi is that of what we Westerners regard as the territory of money gouging or corrupted lawyers.

Role of the Canadian Courts and Khul

Imams in North America have adopted multiple approaches towards Khul in their attempt to give it a religious enforcement and a civil sanctioning. Religious divorce is sought out by women as “a meaningful personal and spiritual process” and is attained, but the imams and qadis have no authority to enact it as a civil decree under our law. Let us take another look at a process with no legality in our nation.

The Process of Annulment for a woman wishing to apply through a Muslim Marriages Tribunal or the court of the qadis for dissolution (faskh) of her marriage is a long and arduous one. First, she must exhaust all possible avenues of reconciliation prior to considering Faskh, for it is construed as the last resort when all other mechanisms have failed.

The following constitute some of the common valid grounds for Faskh:

1. An absent husband through absconding or simply missing ‘in action’. 2. A husband’s failure to provide maintenance through genuine inability or simply refusing to. 3. A serious health condition or disease that could endanger the wife, such as insanity, leprosy, or impotency. 4. Severe abuse whether it is physical, emotional, mental or otherwise. 5. Gross neglect and/or undesirable conduct such that the spouses fear their inability to fulfill the limits prescribed by Allah. 6. A lengthy term of imprisonment of the husband.

The validation usually takes place through an initial Mediation Information Assessment Meeting (MIAM). With this done she is next required to deal with the Pre-Application Assessment Form, providing information and documentation, in order to ascertain the merits of her application. Once successfully completed the woman next will formally apply for dissolution of marriage by completing the Application for Dissolution Form. If she has been successful to this stage a Tribunal will then undertake to establish contact with the husband for the purpose of conducting a hearing wherein both parties should be accorded a fair opportunity to present their case.

Both parties are to be present at all the hearings of the Tribunal in order to state their case, present their evidence and undergo cross examination. In the event of the husband not appearing, the Tribunal reserves the right to issue a default judgment.

Following all this, due process can still entail a substantial amount of time prior to the Tribunal issuing a judgement. If the Tribunal annuls the marriage, the wife will next be required to observe the Iddah.

So, following iddah there she stands with essentially no legal standing. She has no civil decree of divorce recognizable in our land. And, she has proceeded through a process shown to be a violation of both Qur’an and hadith. She can go through all this, but all she has done is made her self an apostate to Islam and truly cannot be allowed to claim herself to be a Muslim.

And think about this: if a woman’s spiritual position is such that she is not even allowed to lead a man in prayer, how can all these boneheads possibly conceive that Allah would possibly allow her to take the lead in instituting talaq?

“One of the things for which Allah has singled out men is that the acts of worship which require physical strength, such as jihad, or require a position of leadership such as leading the prayers, etc., are only for men, and women have nothing to do with them.

Al-Shaafa’i said in al-Umm (1/191): If a woman leads men, women and boys in prayer, then the prayer of the women is valid and the prayer of the men and boys is invalid, because Allah has given men the role of protectors and maintainers of women, and He has not allowed them to be in charge, so it is not permissible for a woman to lead a man in prayer under any circumstances, ever.”

Al-Sa’di, may Allah have mercy on him, said: Men have been favoured over women in numerous ways, such as the fact that positions of leadership and Prophethood are limited to men only, and many acts of worship, such as jihad and leading the Eid prayers and Jumu’ah prayers, are for men only, and Allah has favoured them with intellect, wisdom, patience and toughness which women do not share.“ If desired carry reading on. Ruling on a woman leading men in prayer – islamqa.info

None of this Islamic mess has any legal standing in the Courts of Canada, nor should it ever be permitted to take full root. There needs to be an end to Islam cluttering up our courts, creating unnecessary expense and creating political and social problems. There can be no parallel legal systems in this nation. Do not ascribe to the pretense that the Islamic Courts need to be able to enact khul as a recognizable legal statute within our nation, as necessary to somehow ensure their right to freedom of religion. The claim their faith does not permit them to allow outside intervention into its administration and they require sharia to preserve their cultural, religious heritage is pure jihad through employment of the courts.

Muta (Mut’ah)is an Islamic form of prostitution they call ‘temporary marriage’. Temporary marriage is but a euphemism for prostitution, for muta is a fixed-time marriage arrangement between a man and a woman involving fornication that dissolves once the duration for fornication as set expires.

Muta were permitted by Muhammad so his soldiers could have ‘legal sex’ while away from their real wives at home. Muhammad stated in Surah Al-Ma’idah 5:87: “O you who believe! Make not unlawful and forbid yourselves the Taiyibat(all that is good as regards foods, things, deeds, beliefs, persons, etc.) which Allah has made lawful to you, and transgress not. Verily, Allah does not like the transgressors”.

And the prophet made it abundantly clear that all that is good in the way of persons not to deny themselves from was temporary marriages which allowed them to have sexual unions.

Bukhari 6:60:139: “Narrated Abdullah: We used to participate in the holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no wives with us. So, we said to the Prophet: “Shall we castrate ourselves?” But the Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman temporarily by giving her even a garment, and then he recited: “O you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you.”

And, to fulfill their obligation of mehr (dowry) they could give something as small as a single garment so long as they did not take it back when speaking talaq. After paying the ‘dowry’ and agreed to terms of marriage, there would be no sin for them in sexual union. As stated in Surah An-Nisa 4:24: “And those of whom ye seek content by marrying them, give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty hath been done”.

Today Ayatollahs grant marriages for specific periods of time ranging from hours, days, months to years, as if one were renting an apartment or leasing a vehicle. This makes the Ayatollahs essentially a pack of Islamic pimps, knowing full well that the marriage is being entered into only for the temporary sexual relations, and not to fulfill all the other stipulations by Allah as to marriage, and knowing full well the expiry date before hand when the union it is to terminate.

This is how the demon infested mess of Islam comes up with a permissible solution for endless male fornication and adultery, through buying and divorcing one woman after another. (muta) And, the woman that enters into these arrangements is basically sanctified by Islam as a holy whore.

It is claimed in what I have read that the modern-day Shia are far more ‘on the go’ for the Islamic ho than are the Sunnis. And, by the way these girls have to be Muslim to participate as required by Allah. As to the non-Muslim women, there is no necessity of muta as you can just go ahead a rape them with impunity.

Women Are an Evil Omen

Under Islam when there is sexual sin, women nearly always bear the responsibility of guilt forMuhammad believed that women are an evil omen. Qur’an and hadith are replete with extremely superstitious pagan beliefs. Sahih Bukhari 4:52:111: “Narrated by Sahl bin Sad Saidi: Allah’s Apostle said, “If there is any evil omen in anything, then it is in the woman, the horse and the house.”

The possibility of evil being present in a woman is so great that Allah issues a stern warning to Muslim men about how to approach him in prayer. Allah states don’t pray if you are drunk, sick, gone to the toilet, or have intimately touched a woman lately. And, If you can’t find any water to ritually wash with, just rub some dirt on yourself for even dirt is cleaner than the touch of a woman. And, Surah An-Nisa 4:43: adds “do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying” to the list given in Al-Ma’idah 5:6 following.

“O you who have believed, when you rise to perform prayer, wash your faces and your forearms to the elbows and wipe over your heads and wash your feet to the ankles. And if you are in a state of janabah* then purify yourselves. But if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and do not find water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and hands with it. Allah does not intend to make difficulty for you, but He intends to purify you and complete His favor upon you that you may be grateful.”

Janabah is being in a state of sexual impurity and having not yet taken a ritual cleansing bath.

Women are considered ‘lewd’ creatures, inclined to vile, wicked, indecent, obscene actions inciting men to lust or lechery. Women need to be guarded against and are considered especially dirty during menstruation. It is for such reason there is such separation of the sexes and control of the female.

Al-Baqarah 2:222-223: “And they ask you about menstruation. Say, “It is harm, so keep away from wives during menstruation. And do not approach them until they are pure. And when they have purified themselves, then come to them from where Allah has ordained for you. Indeed, Allah loves those who are constantly repentant and loves those who purify themselves. Your wives are a place of sowing of seed for you, so come to your place of cultivation however you wish and put forth righteousness for yourselves. And fear Allah and know that you will meet Him. And give good tidings to the believers.”

To Allah women are like a dirty field, to be sexually plowed when and where the male desires, but only if they have been ritually cleansed. And, the man must always ritually cleanse himself after any sexual contact for Allah loves clean men as much as he hates menstruating women.

So we have a ‘religion’ based upon female inferiority through an evil nature. A religion demanding separation of the sexes for anyone to be pure enough to approach their God. A religion that considers a natural female body function so evil that they are not even allowed to pray. All this is exemplified in this photograph of Muslim students at their prayer time in our Canadian schools.

Why are we allowing such projections of belief at such extremely serious odds with Canadian values and human rights laws to be projected anywhere that Canadian youth desire education? This is the natural ordering and privilage under Islam: The Boys. The Girls. The Untouchables. Muslim Students Gain Group Prayer Rights In Canadian Schools

Here is a 5 part video series commenced October 2016 with Faith Goldy documenting Islam in our schools and exposing some of the violent behavior by refugees among the children in five different Canadian provinces . Click > www.SchoolyardScandal.com for direct link to view.

The Hell Bound Life for the Muslim Woman

Muhammad offers women little hope for the afterlife. He clearly states that most of the inhabitants of hell are women who were ungrateful to their husbands.

Sahih Al-Bukhari 1052: “The Prophet said: “I saw paradise and stretched my hands towards a bunch of its fruits and had I taken it, you would have eaten from it as long as the world remains. I also saw the Hell-fire and I had never seen such a horrible sight. I saw that most of the inhabitants were women.” The people asked: “O Allah’s Apostle! Why is it so?” The Prophet said: “Because of their ungratefulness.” It was asked whether they are ungrateful to Allah. The Prophet said: “They are ungrateful to their companions of life (husbands) and ungrateful to good deeds.”

Sahih Al-Bukhari 1462: “Muhammad said: “O women! Give to charity, for I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-Fire were women.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is the reason for it?” He said: “O women! You curse frequently, and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. O women, some of you can lead a cautious man astray.”

Sahih Muslim 142: “Muhammad said: O womenfolk, you should give charity and ask much forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell. A wise lady among them said: Why is it, Messenger of Allah, that our folk is in bulk in Hell? Upon this the Holy Prophet observed: You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses. I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but at the same time robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you. Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense and with religion? The Holy Prophet observed: Your lack of common sense can be well judged from the fact that the evidence of two women is equal to one man, that is a proof of the lack of common sense.”

And, it appears it is only common sense for a woman to know that a man’s sexual gratification should always reigns supreme with her, for even the Islamic angels understand this. If a wife does not engage in sex with her husband when he demands her for it, then the angels of Allah will curse her for doing this.

Sahih Bukhari 7:62:122: “Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “If a woman spends the night deserting her husband’s bed, not sleeping with him, then the angels send their curses on her till she comes back to her husband.”

But, if women become obedient to Allah, obedient to their husbands and desist lewd conduct such as their cursing they may then enter paradise. However, like here on earth, this still is not a good deal for them. They simply face an eternity of standing in corners waiting for men to have sex with them.

Sahih Al-Bukhari 4879: “Allah’s Apostle said: “In Paradise there is a pavilion made of a single hollow pearl sixty miles wide, in each corner of which there are wives who will not see those in the other corners; and the believers will visit and enjoy them.”

Girls, for you it is eternal denigrating sexual service, which I believe any sane person would consider to be a hell on earth!

Adultery, Fornication and Punishment

Muslims must not have mercy on people who commit adultery or fornication and they are required to punish them brutally in public with 100 lashes. After the flogging the adulterers are then stoned to death and the unmarried fornicators are simply banished for one year.

An-Nur 24:2: “The unmarried woman or unmarried man found guilty of sexual intercourse: lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah , if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.”

And Sahih Muslim 17:4192 further defines the penalty for ‘illegal sex’ when both subjects are unmarried (fornication); and for adultery when the panting pair are married. Clearly these are cases of ‘risky sex’ perhaps simply having more immediate results than all the sexual diseases that plague the queer coalitions.

Sahih Muslim 17:4192: “‘Ubada b. as-Samit reported that whenever Allah’s Apostle received revelation, he felt its rigour and the complexion of his face changed. One day revelation descended upon him, he felt the same rigour. When it was over and he felt relief, he said: Take from me. Verily Allah has ordained a way for the women who commit fornication. When a married man commits adultery with a married woman, and an unmarried male fornicates with an unmarried woman, then in case of married persons there is a punishment of one hundred lashes and then stoning to death. And in case of unmarried persons, the punishment is one hundred lashes and exile for one year.”

And, for all clear case of persons caught in adultery, they can be executed under Islam. In fact, sharia requires that adulterers be put to death, since it was the example set by Muhammad. The only unmarried sex explicitly allowed in Islam is between a Muslim man and his slaves.

You cannot argue that killing grown adults involved in consensual sex is not firmly rooted in Islamic theology. This doctrine of death is strongly planted in Sahih Muslim 17:4196; 4206, 4209 amid other locations. Muhammad ordered many people be put to death for no crime other than ‘illegal sexual intercourse’.

Sahih Muslim 17:4209: “Abu Huraira and Zaid b Khalid al-Juhani reported that one of the desert tribes came to Allah’s Messenger and said: Messenger of Allah, I beg of you in the name of Allah that you pronounce judgment about me according to the Book of Allah. The second claimant who was wiser than him said: Well, decide among us according to the Book of Allah, but permit me to say something. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger said: Say. He said: My son was a servant in the house of this person and he committed adultery with his wife. I was informed that my son deserved stoning to death as punishment for this offence. I gave one hundred goats and a slave girl as ransom for this. I asked the scholars if this could serve as an expiation for this offence. They informed me that my son deserved one hundred lathes and exile for one year and this woman deserved stoning as she was married. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger said: By Him in Whose Hand is my life. I will decide between you according to the Book of Allah. The slave-girl and the goats should be given back, and your son is to be punished with one hundred lashes and exile for one year. And, O Unais bin Zuhaq al-Aslami, go to this woman in the morning, and if she makes a confession, then stone her. He (a narrator) said: He went to her in the morning and she made a confession. And Allah’s Messenger made pronouncement about her and she was stoned to death.”

Sahih Muslim 17:4196: “Abu Huraira reported that a person from among the Muslims came to Allah’s Messenger while he was in the mosque. He called him saying: Allah’s Messenger. I have committed adultery. The Holy Prophet turned away from him, and he He again came round facing him and said to him: Allah’s Messenger, I have committed adultery. The Holy Prophetturned away until he did that four times, and as he testified four times against his own self, Allah’s Messenger called him and said: Are you mad? He said: No. The prophet said: Are you married? He said: Yes. Thereupon Allah’s Messenger said: Take him and stone him. Ibn Shihab (one of the narrators) said: One who had heard Jabir bin Abdullah saying this informed me thus: I was one of those who stoned him. We stoned him at the place of prayer (either that of Id or a funeral). When the stones hurt him, he ran away. We caught him in the Harra and stoned him to death.”

We continue on this pathway to exemplify once again how the testimony of the male has far greater value than that of the female. We know that in accusing chaste women of sin such as fornication or adultery that one must have four witnesses to validate their claim.

An-Nur 24: 4: “And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses: lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient.”

But, as a man can simply testify against himself or for himself four times as being truthful, in accusing his wife of adultery you see a different scene. He is counted as four separate witnesses while she is accepted as being guilty until she produces her four witnesses in the flesh to the contrary.

An-Nur 24:6: “And those who accuse their wives of adultery and have no witnesses except themselves: then the witness of one of them shall be four testimonies swearing by Allah, that indeed he is of the truthful.”

But we hear in An-Nur 24:8: “But it will prevent punishment from her if she gives four testimonies swearing by Allah that indeed, he is of the liars.”

These ‘at odds couple’ are not now involved in what was once called a Mexican Standoff. “A Mexican standoff is a confrontation between two or more parties in which no participant can proceed or retreat without being exposed to danger. As a result, all participants need to maintain the strategic tension, which remains unresolved until some outside event makes it possible to resolve it.” What looks like a Mexican standoff , projecting equality for the female and an escape clause really is not. The four witness testimony by the female is the four males she must produce, the same as in her attempting to prove a case of rape.

The power of the male and threat level he truly has over the female in Islam is staggering and remaings intact with the ‘four times confession song and dance’ shown here. Simply on his own word the man can place a woman into a lifetime of confinement for fornication ‘until Allah ordains for them another way.”

An-Nisa 4:15: “Those who commit unlawful sexual intercourse of your women: bring against them four witnesses from among you. And if they testify, confine the guilty women to houses until death takes them or Allah ordains for them another way.”

And, sad to state the ‘other way that Allah too often endorses’ is some format of ongoing spousal abuse that may extend into brutal execution. In practice Muslim women are executed far more often as they are the Bad Omen presumed to be the true source of sexual sin and number one posts to practice whipping or targets to throw killing stones at.

For a Muslim woman the opportunity of getting stoned in these difficult times does not entail relaxing the drug laws or establishing safe injection sites to get a Liberal High, it only takes remaining enmeshed in Islam. “Numerous examples of stoning adulterers under Islamic law persist, from the Islamist frontier of Somalia to the modern state of Iran. In 2010, the Taliban planted a couple having unauthorized sex in the ground and brutally pelted them with stones, with the man having to be finished off with three gunshots. This was only a few days after they flogged a pregnant woman 200 times and then shot her in the head. In “condemning” the killings, the “moderate” president of Afghanistan would only say that it was wrong because it were not preceded by a trial. Likewise, a leading theologian in Iran defended a recent stoning sentence simply by reminding his audience that Democracy, freedom, and human rights have no place in Islam.”

And I must remind you, if Canada is to truly espouse democracy, freedom, and human rights for its female citizens it must banish Islam from sea to shining sea.

WIFE BEATING

A little cross cultural exchange program, welcoming the new mass of Muslim refugees, eh? Well, in the Muslim world, the woman is to be carved at the bottom of the totem pole, a lesser life form to be hammered and chiseled into what he wants her to be.

Sex is but one area that the male expects obedience to be displayed by his wife. But, Allah allows men to demand sex and if their wives are unwilling the path for the man to follow is clear.

Wife-beating is an acceptable form of behavior in Islam. As Allah states when necessary simply beat her and make her stay in the bedroom.

An-Nisa 4:34: “Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and as to those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.”

Allah’s system is perfectly clear that the husband is to administer increasingly harsher penalties for continued wrongdoing by his wife. He should first verbally admonish her. Next, he should ground her to the bedroom like a child and starve her of sex, affection and attention. And finally, when all else fails, he should beat her. In many instances the male goes straight to the beating at his first perceived hint of what he thinks is disobedience.

Muslims struggle with this passage and have sought ways to water down its clear meaning. But according to the man Islam considers the last and greatest prophet, spousal abuse is permissible and at times even required. Modern nations that have established laws against spousal abuse are therefore in direct violation of Allah’s command in the Qur’an. So, who’s laws do true Muslims have to follow? Duh! You are either prepared to be a beater or one understanding it can be necessary for you to be beaten, or you simply are not a Muslim.

Muslim men are fully sanctioned Wife Beaters.

The idea of equality and dignity of women under Sharia (Islamic law) does not exist. A Muslim woman is the property of her husband. A Muslim husband has the legal right and religious obligation to beat a wife if she disobeys him, is disloyal to him or simply does not please him. The concept of wife abuse does not exist in Islam and there is no concept of martial rape. A Muslim woman simply cannot refuse sex with her husband and be obedient to Allah. According to Islamic law, a husband may strike his wife for any one of the following acts of disobedience: (1) She refuses to meet his sexual demands. (2) She does not attempt to make herself beautiful sexually attractive for him. (3) She leaves the house without his permission or a “legitimate reason”. (4) She neglects her religious duties.

Wives were beaten with Muhammad’s approval and the practice continues today. The Sunnis and Shia argue over the issue but both Qur’an and the hadith support the practice. The hadith are Islamic historical documents and not considered the official word of Allah, but are used by all Muslims as a reference for their religion and how to practice it. At times the hadith are contradictory both to the Qur’an and to themselves which helps fuel the irrational Islamic mess called faith or religion.

Under Islam you do not need to fear being called to account for beating your wife: Abu Dawud:11: 2142: “Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab: The Prophet said:A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.”

The Qur’an tells men to take a green branch to beat their wives. A green branch is more flexible and thus should inflict more whip style pain. Allah tells Job how he is to beat his wife in Surah Sad 38:44: “And take in your hand a green branch and beat her with It and do not break your oath; surely We found him patient; most excellent the servant! Surely he was frequent in returning to Allah.” (Shakir)

In Sahih Bukhari 7:72:715: we are told a woman was beaten so badly that her skin is described as being “greener” than the green veil she was wearing. “Narrated ‘Ikrima: “Rifa’a divorced his wife whereupon Abdur-Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. Aisha said that the lady came, wearing a green veil and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Apostle came, Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!” When Abdur-Rahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, “By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this,” holding and showing the fringe of her garment, Abdur-Rahman said, “By Allah, O Allah’s Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa’a.” Allah’s Apostle said, to her, “If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa’a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you.” Then the Prophet saw two boys with ‘Abdur-Rahman and asked him, “Are these your sons?” On that Abdur-Rahman said, “Yes.” The Prophet said, “You claim what you claim, that he is impotent? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow.”

In Sahih Muslim 4:2127 we see Muhammad struck his favorite wife, Aisha, in the chest one evening when she left the house without his permission. “Aisha narrates, He said: Was it the darkness of your shadow that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it.”

In Abu Dawud 2126: “A man from the Ansar called Basrah said: ‘I married a virgin woman in her veil. When I entered upon her, I found her pregnant. I mentioned this to the Prophet.’ The Prophet said: ‘She will get the dower, for you made her vagina lawful for you. The child will be your slave. When she has begotten a child, flog her’. Muhammad tells him to treat the woman as a sex slave and to flog her after she delivers the child.

And Muhammad said to keep the threat of flogging highly apparent to women. In al-Zamkhshari 1, p. 525: “Kash-shaf: Muhammad said, “Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it”.

I have quickly shown you that nothing can be argued about this matter around wife beating. Allah and his Prophet have decreed what the ‘perfect Muslim male is to do’ to keep the wife in line.

NOW, go to Wife Beating In IslamIt is, I believe, the most comprehensive, well written, annotated, referenced and documented publication on our topic that you shall ever find.

It is so well presented, that along with me, I believe you will fully agree with the author in his Conclusion: “It’s been established that the Islamic source materials command the beating of disobedient wives. Wife beating occurred in early Islam with Muhammad’s approval and it is part of Islam’s theology for family management. This beating is meant to inflict pain in order to bring the wife into submission to her husband. The beating cannot break bones, disfigure, or injure the wife, but can cause pain and bruise her.

Islam states that the man is superior to the woman and positions the wife subordinate to her husband. As her superior he is given authority over her. If she persists in disobedience to him the Qur’an commands him to beat her. Muhammad institutionalized wife beating and his edict is accepted and supported by the majority of Muslims worldwide.

This legal method of harsh discipline degrades and de-humanizes women. They become servants, they become possessions, they become prized animals that are to be treated kindly but disciplined when the husband feels she is disobedient. There is no way to justify the institutionalized physical and psychological abuse of women commanded by Islam. Islam is not the solution, it is the problem.”

You fool Trudeau. You think that it is pejorative to use the word barbaric in relation to honor killing. You say that the tone is the problem, that it expresses contempt or disapproval that might get the hackles of our Muslim refugees up. The tone is the problem? Hackles up?

You certainly get an A+ for your ongoing stupidity in this one Trudeau. You see A is for Afghan……. A is for asshole…….and you are one stupid Afghan embracing asshole if you think Canadians approve of what you politicians have brought into our midst. Is my choice of the word asshole pejorative Baby T?

Let us take a look at your amicable Afghans. First the settled in and culturally acclimatized Toronto types. Examples of those that could buy their way in through financial investments.

It is true ‘Honor killings’ are on the rise in Canada, but the so-called expert who compiled this for our government is absolutely wrong in many of his claims. He states that honor killings are not in any way condoned in the Qur’an, Islam’s holy book, which is absolutely wrong. He also suggested the idea is coming up more simply as a defense for murder by people hoping to take advantage of Canada’s cultural sensitivity in order to receive a more lenient sentence.

It is due to our governments brain dead funding policies and embracing this format of misinformation that we face the mess we have today.

Speaking of brain dead, it does not get better for Trudeau when you look at the hijab issue, oath of allegiance and matters of concealment. Concealment? Yep, concealment. Honor killing? Yep, and concealment and honor killing are woven into the same cloth of Islam you half French fool.

Concealment? You certainly cannot conceal what you are Baby T and what you embrace. Some of your comments are so shallow and utterly contemptible that they could drive a hungry dog off the gut wagon carting your ideology.

There is no where in your speeches surrounding the niqab that you have addressed the crux of opposition to the niqab. Nor, will you directly respond to questions surrounding the reality of the contemporary experiences faced by Canadians due to Muslims in Canada. And now you want us to embrace demonized barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, ‘honor killings,’ female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence.

And let us get this clear: The debate over changes to the federal government Discover Canada Guide aimed at immigrants seeking citizenship was because Ottawa added a passage to the guide to inform readers thus: “Canada’s openness and generosity do not extend to barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, ‘honor killings,’ female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence.”

Neutrality? So, with Liberal neutrality we can’t even call cold-blooded murder of a family members through honor killing ” a barbaric Islamic practice”. Stuff it Trudeau.

Why spin? Well, why the rerun now? Because the CBC must always redirect public attention to justice for their queers in formation, in one form or another. And, it looks like you Trudeau, the King of the Queer Tier, is starting to swim against a tide that has turned against him. The actions of Donald Trump since inauguration have proven this.

So, what about your actions through cabinet deployments baby T? I think your Muslim Momma Monsef compliments the case as to where you stand. And that stance truly is not in the interest of Canada.

Well, there is a lot more wrong with you Trudeau, but you will not be around long enough to detail it all. But, as to Honor Killings: here is but a snippet taken from their “rotting Islamic source”.

Your wives and children are your enemies. They are to you only a temptation.

At-Taghabun 64:14-15: “O you who have believed, indeed, among your wives and your children are enemies to you, so beware of them. But if you pardon and overlook and forgive, then indeed Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Your wealth and your children are but a trial, and Allah has with Him a great reward.”

Acting for Allah, you kill the child so you can receive better.

This parable in Al-Kahf 18:65-81 lays the theological groundwork for honor killings. The story tells of Moses encountering a man with “special knowledge” who does things which don’t seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason. However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would “grieve” his parents by “disobedience and ingratitude.” He was killed so that Allah could provide them a ‘better’ son.

Al-Kahf 18:80-81: “And as for the boy, his parents were believers, and we feared that he would overburden them by transgression and disbelief. So, we intended that their Lord should substitute for them one better than him in purity and nearer to mercy.”

The example of the son shows such violence applies to both sexes. But we tend to think of it primarily being directed toward the female because of the absolute male dominance in Islam.

But the Qur’an demands death of anyone leaving Islam.

An-Nisa 4:89: “They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So, do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.”

At-Tawbah 9:123:127: “O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous. And whenever a surah is revealed, there are among the hypocrites those who say, “Which of you has this increased faith?” As for those who believed, it has increased them in faith, while they are rejoicing. But as for those in whose hearts is disease, it has only increased them in evil, in addition to their evil. And they will have died while they are disbelievers. Do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice but then they do not repent nor do they remember? And whenever a surah is revealed, they look at each other, saying, “Does anyone see you?” and then they dismiss themselves. Allah has dismissed their hearts because they are a people who do not understand.”

And, the unbelievers closest to you to be fought against are ‘your wives and your children’ if you follow Islam and believe they have departed the ways of Allah in any manner. This warning is given that one is not to show any kind of leniency towards them because of your personal or family or economic connections with them. To do so shows that one stands against the fear of Allah and is an apostate. The fear of Allah and friendly relations with the enemies of Allah are contradictory things which a devout Muslim cannot embrace no matter how heinous the act may be to the Western mind.

According to the article Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings, by Phyllis Chesler, as published in the Middle East Forum, Muslims do 91 % of honor killings worldwide and 96 % of honor killings in Europe. This is a very well done analysis of honor killing, offering some solid social prerogatives for solution to the issue. “Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings,”

After reading this, who do you think has done between 91% to 96 % of the honor killings in Canada? And the volume of such can only increase with the increase of Muslim presence in Canada and welcoming a way of life that espouses such hatred.

Or perhaps you want to take baby for a walk with women like this. The woman was part of three suicide bombers targeting an open market in Nigeria. Due to alert security, they blew up at a checkpoint instead.

This certainly can happen when you raise baby to be a Muslim so be careful who you walk with in the parks, be it daylight or dark.

CHILD REARING IN THE ISLAMIC MANNER

Raising Up Killers

“Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3)

What are the true values of Islam that are common with Canadian values? Do we believe in raising our children to be suicide bombers and believe they are blessed by God for doing such horrendous acts? Canadians do not, but followers of Muhammad do. The evidence of male children used as jihad soldiers and suicide bombers is indisputable and we are seeing an increasing frequency of females being used in such manner as well. Girls as young as 10 years of age are being used in such fashion. This poses no problem to the Muslim faith that also employs girls of such an age as brides and sex slaves. The Qur’an and Hadith demand growing up of children to be utilized in such fashion when necessary to glorify their Allah. http://www.news.com.au/world/africa/militants-force-a-girl-10-to-become-a-suicide-bomber-in-sickening-market-attack-in-nigeria/story-fnh81gzi-1227181138127

The parents were raised as such children themselves and they are also prepared to kill their own children for not following the true tenants of Islam. This has been designated ‘honor killing’ and truly has nothing to do with ‘common Canadian goals’ that we should be embracing in any fashion domestically or looking to partner with in some fashion ‘internationally’. Given the evidence that ‘common sense’ clearly states, the only ‘common goals’ all true Muslims embrace is for your ultimate submission to following their faith.

Whatever, I quote from a past article by Debbie Schlussel which hits Canada’s malaise surrounding ‘honor killing’ squarely on the head. It would do you good to read the entire article. Our Shafia Kingston Trio is being touted as ‘They’re not Muslim Murderers. They’re “Exotic Immigrants” that the Canadian system simply has failed.

“Alia Hogben, executive director of the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, believes “the system” failed the three because they were treated as “exotic” minorities rather than “ordinary” Canadians. “Exotic,” indeed. Um, sorry, but as much as Muslims, and their apologists like Wall Street Journal reporter Alistair MacDonald, would like to think of themselves as extraordinary and better than all of us, they are about as “exotic” as “exotic dancers and the poles around which they gyrate”. (With apologies to both the strippers and the herpes-infested pole for the degrading comparison). And even more phony is the Wall Street Journal apologist MacDonald’s pretense at reporting.

Yes, and Islam continues to be the problem along with Canada’s stance of not calling it for exactly what it is. Islam is evil as it brings up killers from one generation to the next as required of its true followers. But, do we finally see some ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ or is more Islamic deception simply spreading about our nation?

If you read the article it sounds suspiciously like More Muslim Mush. The father that ‘blew the whistle on his son’ can simply be furthering the ends of promoting a cloud of deception called ‘moderate Islam’. The father is either a hypocrite to the call of jihadi Islam and not a true Muslim or simply biding his own time for action. Perhaps the son is simply protecting his father? Wake up Canada. The Muslim is rewarded for all lies necessary to establishing their caliphate! What ‘common values’ do you hold with such spiritual garbage cans? The ‘claimed moderates of Islam are in reality the extremists of Islam’ for it is they that do not interpret the Qur’an correctly. They must twist the Surah and Hadith through philosophical, mystical and allegorical interpretations to try to justify remaining and stating their faith in Allah. Are they truly in deception or simply biding their time until they can take the upper hand and fully enact sharia?

We are going to take a look at the Muslim Bosniak American/Canadian community that states it prides itself on deeply rooted commitment to the values of family. If this is true they are not rooted in Canadian values for we do not believe in ‘honor killing’ of our family members as espoused and practiced by Islam. This will further exemplify the true values of Islam and manners in which they are not common with cherished Canadian values. I shall extract from my posting Muslim Bosniak Maniacs posted on March 1, 2015 and you can read the rest from the link.

A general statement from their web site: “The Congress of North American Bosniaks (CNAB) is a National Umbrella Organization, representing at least 350,000 Americans and Canadians of Bosniaks descent and origin. Its membership is comprised of fraternal, educational, veteran, religious, cultural, social, business, political organizations and individual members. The Bosniak American – Canadian community prides itself on its deeply rooted commitment to the values of family, faith, democracy, hard work and fulfillment of the American and Canadian dreams. We are present in every state and virtually every community in America and Canada on various social, business and economic levels.”

Exhibiting a split spiritual personality because of their ‘deeply rooted commitment to the value of their faith’ they attempt to inaugurate and perpetuate practices in our society that can only turn both the ‘American and Canadian dreams’ into a living nightmare.

The Bosniaks who state that Islam does not call for ‘honor killing’ are simply demon infested liars. Further, when they claim to be the friends of the Jews as does ‘The Bosniak and Jewish Solidarity’ organization they expose themselves to charges of sheer stupidity.

“The Bosniak and Jewish Solidarity is an NGO that promotes friendship between Jewish and Bosniak people. Jews and Bosnian Muslims have a common historical bond, they both suffered genocide at the hands of Serbian Nazi collaborators in the World War II. In the Bosnian war, Bosniak people suffered the first genocide in Europe since the Holocaust. We advocate peace and we stand against the denial of the Holocaust and the Bosnian Genocide.”

Only a fool would claim that the Holocaust and Bosnian Genocide did not take place. But, only a bigger fool would claim that Islam advocates peace with all religions and that Islam condones friendship between its followers and Jews. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was a fool of sufficient proportion to deny the Holocaust, but certainly never a hypocrite to Islam by claiming the Muslims were to be friends of the Jews. He openly stated he wanted the Jews wiped from the face of the earth.

For the Jew or Christian, Islam means war, persecution and death and the Qur’an states to “fight and slay the pagan Christians wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush” (Surah 9:5) Islam is the same now as during the years Muhammad first turned to raiding caravans and attacking all who opposed him. At that time the Jews of the Arabian Peninsula saw Muhammed exactly for what he was, a demon possessed false prophet, and the Jewish-Muslim relations throughout his career were extremely hostile. The Jews tried to avoid Islamic domination, but many of them like at An-Nadir and Medina were driven from their lands. Other suffered martyrdom such as over six hundred men at Banu Quraizah. All such activity was fully sanctioned by Muhammad and the Qur’an where many negative things are spoken about the Jews. They are called illogical, vile hard-hearted hypocrites that twisted their scriptures and murdered their prophets. They are warned of Hell fire if they reject Muhammed and the Qur’an, and for certain the Muslims have never been called to be friends of the Jews.

Read what Surah Al-Imran has to say about those who take Christians and Jews as friends. Read how the Jews are described by the Muslim Allah and how they are to be viewed by his followers of deception. Surah Al-Imran 51:60 “O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya to one another. And if any among you takes them as Auliya, then surely he is one of them. Verily, Allah guides not those people who are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers and unjust). “Say O Muhammad to the people of the Scripture: “Shall I inform you of something worse than that, regarding the recompense from Allah: those Jews who incurred the Curse of Allah and His Wrath, those of whom He transformed into monkeys and swine, those who worshipped Taghut (false deities); such are worse in rank on the Day of Resurrection in the Hell-fire, and far more astray from the Right Path in the life of this world.”

So, if a Muslim is a friend to the Christian or Jew he is ‘one of us’. I guess he would be better off as a Christian though, for it is Jews that Allah transformed into monkeys and swine. Perhaps our friendly Bosniaks are really Jews in disguise and simply cannot reconcile themselves whether they prefer bananas or slop. I vote they are swine from the amount of ‘swill’ that comes out of their mouths. Whatever, they are at very best hypocrites to the book of hypocrisy they claim to believe if they state they are friends of the Jews!

Muhammad calls Christians and Jews ‘the vilest of animals’ and ‘losers’. With them being so hated by Allah it is nonsensical to even intimate that Muhammad would then recommend them to be taken in as friends by Muslims.

These Bosniak people and their supporters need a serious wake-up call for neither the country nor the color of the man it comes out of changes the stench, as all hypocrisy smells the same in the nostrils of God! Stoke up the flames for our Bosniaks are headed for the lake of fire as hypocrites of Islam or being cast there by the Lord Jesus Christ as God denying liars! You cannot hide from the truth Bosniaks and the day of your exposure is fully here. “For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known. Therefore, whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.” (Luke 12:2-3) Why carry on doing your verbal hypocritical tap dance of the devil when you could know absolute freedom through admitting that Islam is based upon darkness, deceit and death to all that oppose it? Not to do so is to lie and to lie is a sin, but “if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9) Simply admit you are a sinner and ask Jesus Christ to be the Lord of your life. God will instantly bind you to Him in a personal relationship based on love and freedom from all fear of having to please Him through submission demanding the death of your family members. I must warn you that not to do so entails eternal separation from the God that created you; and I am called to personally address this appeal for redemption to the Bosniak leadership listed following. I must also tell all others: “Do they not err that devise evil? but mercy and truth shall be to them that devise good. Cease, my son, to hear the instruction that causes to err from the words of knowledge. An ungodly witness scorns judgment: and the mouth of the wicked devours iniquity. Judgments are prepared for scorners, and stripes for the back of fools.” (Proverbs 14:22; 19:27-29) Come out from the midst of the foolish ones for as once spoken to the Jew is now spoken to you: “O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. The LORD stands up to plead, and stands to judge the people.” (Isaiah 3:12-13) Acknowledge sin and accept Jesus Christ for there is no need for your fear of judgment by a God that loves you.

We start toward closing by looking at a group of people within our Canadian government that must in some manner believe the lie that Muslims are friends of Jews. ‘The Friends of Bosnia and Herzegovina Group’ in the Canadian Parliament is such and supposedly comprised of 26 members under the following leadership at time of writing.

This is their ‘Group’ policy as extracted from their web: “Strong relations between our motherland and Canada is our priority, and the process of lobbying for the interests of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Canadian cultural mosaic must continue. The special assembly on Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Canadian Parliament will provide support to the Canadian Parliament with the necessary political and economic reforms in Bosnia and Herzegovina, to improve cooperation between the two states. With this new establishment, there is an aim to also improve cooperation between the two parliaments, and the present the values of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Canadian society.”

The Group currently has 26 members and there is nothing humorous about the evil intent at the core of the Bosniak-Maniacs. So, listen up ‘groupies’ for what you support determines personal eternal results for you. You cannot support people who are agents of the devil in his activities and escape unscathed. It is stated that ‘special credit’ for the formation of the Group must be given to MP Nina Grewal. Did Grewal ensure her parliamentary associates were aware the Qur’an’s ‘Law of Equality’ assigns human value and rights based on gender, religion and status? And, this is the polar opposite of equality in the sense intended by Canadian political-social tradition which makes no such distinction. The Qur’an devaluation of non-Muslims is so foul that it teaches that while a Muslim may be punished with death for murdering a fellow Muslim (Bukhari 83:17), no Muslim can be put to death for killing a non-Muslim (Bukhari 83:50, 3:111) . Muhammad flatly stated: “No Muslim can be killed for killing a kafir”. Grewal and Group you are what the Qur’an defines as a kafir, so it is time to clear your heads and start to right the wrong you perpetuate within the Canadian Parliamentary system. I am going to let the words of Bill Walker aptly tell you how the Muslim truly views you ‘kafir groupies’.

“The Qur’an defines kafirs. The word “unbeliever” does not remotely carry the meaning of kafir. A kafir is less than human. The word “kafir” is the worst word in the human language. Kafirs can be hated, assassinated, deceived, enslaved, robbed, plotted against, raped, tortured, mocked and demeaned in every way.

Mohammed repeatedly advised Muslims to deceive the kafir in order to advance Islam. Deceiving kafirs is Sunna, in the way of Mohammed, the perfect Muslim. A Muslim is to tell the truth to another brother Muslim, but, if it will advance Islam, they can deceive the kafir. Does this mean that a Muslim deceives kafirsall the time? Of course not, but if it advances Islam, deception is ethical. Mohammed said: war is deception. Who is the war with? Kafirs are the only enemy of Islam. Mohammed was at a state of permanent war with them. During the last 9 years of his life, he launched and led a violent event on the average of every 6 weeks. He employed deception against the kafirs again and again. Deception is Sunna.”

And you are in the greatest of deceptions kafirs if you do not eradicate Muslim female oppression from our land. Many Canadians have become somehow enmeshed with the superstition and beliefs of Islam, unable to judge right from wrong. Forty-four years ago, even a blind man could see that our society had been blind-sided by Satan. Give a listen to Stevie Wonder and ‘Superstition’. A very catchy old tunethat might jump start you forward and awake you to your reality now. Superstition – Stevie Wonder with Lyrics

You kafirs are as responsible for extending evil and destruction from generation to generation as are the Muslim parents raising their children to be killers like themselves. Islam is what it does through the actions it takes to raise Brand 13 Kids.

Both popular and unpopular musical styles comprise the ‘hymns’ of our secular culture. Sometimes the musicians, skilled or unskilled, are reflective of what has happened, or what they believe is happening politically, socially and spiritually important. And every so often God ‘tweaks the conscience of man’ through secular music ‘sound bites’ to stir the mix and get a spiritual being activated a little so he will speak out about the problems of his time. “The ´Sound of Silence´ uses imagery of light and darkness to show how ignorance and apathy destroy people´s ability to communicate on even a simple level. The light symbolizes truth and enlightenment. Both music and lyrics are perfectly fitting.” It was written and performed by Paul Simon, a man that once said “he thanked God for the gifts that he was given and for letting him live the dream that he dreamed when he was 12 years old.”

So, to all the 60’s crew of kafir turkeys still above ground: has the drug induced, dope smoke fungus grown larger and lodged harder in that area between your ears since the 1960’s? It was then Paul Simon had “a vision softly creeping” that “left its seeds” while he was sleeping and the vision was planted in his brain, and still remains “within the sound of silence.” You did not hear the silence message given in the early sixties recording and it was brought back to a very widespread awareness in the Simon & Garfunkel – The Sound of Silence – Madison Square Garden, NYC – 2009/10/29&30 concert in 2009. It was once again returned to a “people talking without speaking, people hearing without listening, and no one dared disturb the sound of silence.”

At the time there should have been a screaming public outcry against Islam in New York City, and no one again dared disturb the sound of silence. And like the song stated I state to you “fools, you do not know silence like a cancer grows”. And grow it did until the cancerous evil of Islam exploded in the 9/11 twin towers Muslim attack on America in 2001. Following it the silence of political correctness was broken to some degree, but unless the reality of Islam is now shouted from every free rooftop the jihadi conquest shall carry forward until all free speech is silenced. The last time I know that Paul Simon was used live to call you fools to know you truly remain silent fools if you do not speak out against Islam was at the 9/11Ten Year Memorial in New York City in 2011. Paul Simon’s Touching ‘Sound of Silence’ 9/11 Tribute: Watch

Here we are years later and it seems you need another musical format to speak to the cause of the deception you remain under. Whether you value the musical style or not this truly is acrash course on our deception underway…..K Rino Grand Deception Don’t end up another decapitated kafir turkey. Recognize the Islamic deception for all it is and break the silence about the curse of Islam perpetuated and spread through the children that it spawns.

THE BRAND 13 KIDS

Brand 13 is symbolic of the evil imprint of Satan upon what you say, do and think. Ranging from superstition, through obsession to absolute possession it is not a label you want to stitch into the garments of your life. Islam stamps you with this Brand 13 so parents tell your offspring to take a good look at the Muslim person they have moved over for to take a seat in their classroom, bus or at the medical center. Tell them to observe them carefully for many among them are Brand 13 Kids raised by a system that breeds natural born killers.

In spite of their difference in dress they may perhaps look normal to you, or even attractive, but that is the deception.These are creatures who come forth from the womb stamped with Brand 13 for evil is the essence of their spirituality, being wickedchildren of the Devil. Satan is their father and like him they have no inherent ability to speak the fullness of Truth. So know that “the wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.” (Psalms 58:3) They are a species you must come to recognize and know how to deal with.

As you look about you will see others that look very similar. These critters are from amid the sons and daughters of men that descend through steps of satanic deception until they totally succumb and remain under its blackened label. They are only born into the Islamic system and culture of death; they could escape from this except for their personal weakness based on fear. They moan and groan, but in their hearts they have been raised Muslim and so they remain Muslim.

It is easy to recognize the supposed ‘radical fighters’ on the Middle Eastern battlefields. And because Muslim people are fleeing from the midst of the Islamic scrappers many assume they are not radical in their beliefs. Further, people that have been emotionally media duped by scenes of women and children in dire circumstance thus rush to their aide. The fact is that both the fighters and the refugee runners are all adherents of the same Qur’an and Islamic faith. To simply be a Muslim one must desire to see the ascendency of sharia globally and the methods employed are ultimately destructive to Western society in every case. You should not hurry to help these people for you only rush to destroy yourself.

The recent swamp load of snakes drained from Syria into Canada by our ‘fool on Capitol Hill’ are Muslim and born into radical belief that shall mature here to your destruction. But among them are also fully developed vipers that have used the Canadian Syrian refugee plan to find their way here. You need to face up to such facts and you can thank the Trudeau ship of fools for escalating the headaches of our nation.

We read in the Bible that the apostle Paul received a God-given dream known as the Macedonian Call. In his vision the Macedonians needed spiritual help and by answering the call “the history of the church—and of the world—forever changed”. What is the Macedonian Call? – GotQuestions.org Home The Macedonia of Paul’s day entailed the northern and central parts of modern-day Greece. Greece is in a social-economic mess, growing greater by the day. They do not even know how to deal properly with their border defence of Macedonia. And Canada needs to give a “Canadian Call to Macedonia” for they seem the ones best suited to deal with the Syrian Refugee crisis. Make the call Canada, perhaps President Gjorge Ivanov will tell you how to start undoing the damage we have just done to ourselves rushing the Syrians in.

After all Canada: “Look at these passports and papers. They are all forged or stolen. We have already seized 9,000 of them. Some so-called refugees are travelling through the whole of Europe with false identities, and Greece is simply stamping their papers so that they continue on their journey. We have to assume that many of these people who were travelling with forged papers want to enter the EU via the refugee route as radical fighters.” Gjorge Ivanov, President, Macedonia

They have also entered Canada in such manner, so if one of the ‘ethnic profile observable types’ leaves a package or pack behind: immediately vacate the bus. Avoiding the potential boom will be much harder for you daycare bleeding hearts though. The devout Muslim has no problem dropping there kid off to stay with an exploding Atomic Teddy Bear or Burka Barbie Bombshell in tow. Both they and the kid will be rewarded by Allah for ‘fighting the good fight’. IS plants ‘baby doll bombs’ on road to Karbala The next ‘Syrian child-care issue’ you fools may face has potential of being your last.

Ultimately the only answer with respect to the ever sickening Syrian situation is not to embrace them, but to totally isolate them and house them in North American comfort for the shortest period of time it takes to “return them to sender”. As an escort out let they be accompanied by those who rushed them in and make certain the door closes tightly upon the entire asinine compliment. Sound a bit harsh do I? Well, let me give you a view of the version of the child that the Qur’an, hadith and examples of Muhammad show the child a Muslim is required to raise. The upbringing is done publicly in countries under their dominion and in private in the nations where they are waiting to fully institute sharia.

Brainwashing Kids for Jihad This brief Clarion video report starts with an Australian wake-up mate about how Muslims teach their children to hate instead of love.Watch And to see the reality of the international connections and youth range of our terrorists is in a bedtime story for you: English Teenage Girl Pleads Guilty in Australian Bomb-Plot

November 9, 2015 Five Child-Incitement Hot SpotsIslamists employ a strategy of utilizing children to carry forward their jihadi warfare. Children as young as five are being brainwashed and becoming trained killers, learning how to shoot and slaughter through such methods as lynching, beheading and suicide bombings. Read about how it’s done. More

The Taliban has long-employed children to carry out their murderous deeds, from blowing up IED’s to suicide bombings. Children make great spies for the Taliban, gleaning information about the location of Afghan and foreign troops without arousing suspicion. Afghan children are cynically recruited from poor parents with promises of free food, lodging and education at the Taliban’s madrasas (religious schools). There, they are brainwashed to give their lives fighting against the “infidel,” the “invading foreign forces” that they are told are raping their mothers and sisters. They are brainwashed to believe even their fellow Afghans that the children will take down with them in suicide operations “deserve to die,” since they are “American collaborators.”

Promises of a better “tomorrow” are made to the children. “They offer them visions of paradise, where rivers of milk and honey flowed, in exchange for giving up his life by becoming a suicide bomber” said an official in an interview with the BBC. More

For certain watch this Frontline video… Children Of ISIS (Full Film) | FrontlineAmong the Syrian refugee children are such as the filmed who state…“I am listening, I am obeying.” If not trained in camps, they have been trained in their homes. We have already allowed entry of persons fully lodged in this mental condition. We see through Islam a state of the world spoken to in Matthew 10:21 where “brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death.” It is further described in Luke 21:16 as a time “you will be betrayed even by parents and brothers and relatives and friends, and they will put some of you to death.” We are in such chaotic times.

And now let’s jump over to good old Palestine child rearing, eh? A lot of you knuckleheads are a way too quick to support this bunch in stances against Israel. There is no difference to how they raise their kids than any other Muslim, and you kafirs better soon wake up to this fact of life!

November 8, 2015 Palestinian TV Show for Kids Glorifies ‘Hero’ Stabbers A children’s show on Palestinian TV featuring two young girls as the show’s hosts praises the Palestinian murderers of Jews as our “young heroes who carried out all those great heroic acts.” Many of the recent acts of terror – including stabbing attacks, car ramming’s and shootings – against Israelis have been committed by teenage perpetrators. Recently a 16-year old shot two teenagers Friday night at one of the holiest Jewish sites – the Cave of the Patriarchs – in Hebron.

Despite video footage to the contrary, the show’s hosts also make the false claim that, “When the settlers see a Palestinian walking down the street, they throw a knife next to him and claim that he was trying to carry out a stabbing operation.”

The television show– ironically called Grownup Kids – is one of the many examples of the incitement of Palestinian media targeted at children, a media that glorifies and condones brutal acts of violence and cultivates a cult of death that has become the signature component of Palestinian terrorism.”

November 11, 2015 When Media Is Used To Poison An Entire GenerationThe current wave of terror attacks by Palestinians against Israelis has seen younger and younger terrorists perpetrating horrific stabbing attacks. Muslims are proudly posting photos of their toddlers wielding murderous weapons. More

And here Palestinian Authority TV Teaches Children The Joys Of Martyrdom This Palestinian TV music video, shown hundreds of times, features Muhammad Al-Dura, the boy who was killed in a televised crossfire (apparently by Palestinians). Al-Dura calls other children to follow him to paradise. Al-Dura is shown frolicking joyously on the beach, with his kite, and even going to an amusement park. It opens with Al-Dura calling to children: “I am waving to you, not in parting, but to say follow me to paradise.” Watch

Satan has gotten nearly all religions to bed down together in some areas through poisoned multi-cultural interfaith doctrines and programs. And the Islamic kids for certain are crawling in through your ‘bedroom window with Trudeau’ in one form or another. Here is some more of what has been raised to take your bench in the park. We will start out with Justin Trudeau’s good old embraceable Iran.

July 9, 2015 Iranian City Offers Combat Training Program for Kids The purpose of the program is ‘to introduce children to the concepts of holy defense, knowledge of the enemy and fighting the Saudis and America.’ Read this short but highly informative article.

Then in Iraq we read July 13, 2015 ‘ISIS Blows Up Baby In Training Class Demo’ “Dozens of Islamic State recruits watched as the baby was blown up by remote control. The organization booby trapped the baby in front of dozens of armed ISIS men and then detonated it from afar. The rigging of the baby and its detonation was a training exercise of ISIS to teach its people booby-trapping techniques.”

On January 4, 2016 you can watchFive ‘Spies’ Killed In Chilling Isis Video Aimed At UKAs an Islamic State video surfaced purporting to show the execution of five British spies. This 10-minute video features a masked man with a British accent who calls the video a message to David Cameron. The video concludes with this young boy saying “we are going to kill the kuffar over there.”

Then from February 11, 2016 you can watch another 8 minute video directed toward the UK featuring the same Muslim child of killer intent: Small Child Executes ‘UK Spies’ In Latest Islamic State Clip And this time the small child executes three alleged spies using a remote control to detonate explosives. This child was brought back from the UK by his mother to be used in such a manner. What did your mother have you doing at such an age kaffir? Wake up, for this is the core value of Islam.

And onward we go to January 13, 2016 and ‘ISIS Training Yazidi Children As Suicide Bombers’An Iraqi source told Egyptian news outlet Al-Ahram that Yazidi children are being trained in special camps to be suicide bombers for ISI. The article also contains a video surrounding the sex slavery of the Yazidi.

On February 11, 2016 we were given opportunity to peruse gender equality Islamic style when Girls Carry Out Suicide Bombing; Kill At Least 58 In NigeriaWe know from subsequent reports the attack was carried out by Boko Haram and hit a refugee camp for people fleeing the violence in the region. Three girls were dispatched to do the work of glorifying Allah, but only two pulled the pin. I assume Muhammad is humming the tune ‘two out of three ain’t bad’.

With his moronic understanding and embracing of Islam I guess this is what Trudeau is going to tout about human rights to ‘gender equality’ until you shrug off all concerns about Muslims, eh? As to gender equality on March 16th 2016 “Trudeau tells a N.Y. crowd to ‘ask any woman they know’ about what work remains on gender equality. I’m going to keep saying loud and clearly that I am a feminist until it is met with a shrug, he said Wednesday. It’s just really, really obvious that we should be standing up for women’s rights and trying to create more equal societies. Like, duh.” Trudeau tells N.Y. crowd to ‘ask any woman they know Ask any woman?Like, duh? Ask the Muslim girls in Nigeria, they know the work that needs to be done to get you to their Islamic view. Ask the suicide sisters in France, they know as well? Ask the devout Muslim Syrian girls that just slipped into Canada next door to you. Like duh Justin? They all know that the work that needs to get done in the institution of sharia in the manner that Islam has them enact. Ask any Muslim woman true to the Prophet and Qur’an how she knows she must raise her child. It is exactly as the child rearing practices have been shown you in this writing!

Trudeau, ‘like duh’, clearly designates yourself and you certainly need a swift kick in your progressive Mullah loving scrotum for the damage you are doing to this nation. Perhaps you would like to bring your ‘progressive boxing skills’ into the ‘cage’ with a 73-year-old man that would be ecstatic at giving you one.

On February 28, 2016 a comprehensive study was published by the Combating Terrorism Center at the United States Military Academy at West Point. Islamic State Mobilizing Children at Unprecedented Rate “Striking is the fact children and youth in the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) are fighting alongside, rather than in lieu of, adults. Whereas, in other conflicts, children are normally used to replace adult fighters as a last resort, as a way to “rapidly replace battlefield losses,” or in a special operation where the child maybe more effective, ISIS is now using children in much the same ways as adults.

Of the 89 cases studies of children dying while fighting for the Islamic State it was found. 33 % were killed on the battlefield as foot soldiers. 6 % died while working as propagandists embedded within units or brigades. 18 % died during marauding operations in which a group of mostly adult fighters infiltrates and attacks an enemy position using light automatic weapons before killing themselves by detonating suicide belts. 39 % died upon detonating a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device (VBIED) against their target. 4 % committed suicide in mass casualty attacks against civilians.” In essence 61% of the Brand 13 Kids were prepared to blow your like duh Liberal kafir asses to smithereens in the cause of Allah.

Conclusions? Like, duh! This has been a small sampling of what has been taking place and shown through the media displaying Islamic affairs and the nature bred into such a people from the womb to the grave. It was not some gun toting in the field, special camp trained kid talked about on January 18, 2016 when Pakistan Arrests Imam After Boy Cuts Off Own ‘Blaspheming’ HandThe reports say that he was later released after pressure from other clerics. Play close attention here.

“Imam Shabbir Ahmed told his congregation at his mosque five days ago “those who love the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) always say their prayers,” according to the Pakistani newspaper Dawn. Ahmed then asked, “Who does not love the Prophet?” adding the words, “raise your hand.” The boy, Anwar Ali, raised his hand after misunderstanding the question.

The Iman then roared from the pulpit that the boy was a “blasphemer who was liable to be killed.” Ali ran straight home, cut off his hand, then returned and presented the severed hand to Imam Ahmed on a plate, police officer Nausher Ahmed said.

His parents and neighbors are reported to have celebrated the boy’s piety and his father said he was proud. “What I did was in love for Prophet Muhammad” the boy told the press.”

This is just a normal Muslim family, not what you pray may be some freak deviant from Islam that you fear and believe ISIS to be.

You hear a lot of government crap about deradicalization programs. Forget them as the country with the worst record for people going to Syria to fight is Tajikistan and What We in the West Can Learn from Tajik Classrooms is stated March 14, 2016. “A school in Dushanbe, Tajikistan is hoping to stop the next generation of young people from becoming radicalized by introducing counter-radicalization classes in religious education. In a country where, according to official figures, more than a thousand citizens have traveled to Syria to join the Islamic State, the problem is acute.” and “although experts say the program will have no impact on those currently joining extremist groups, Tajik authorities hope the education will impact the next generation and keep them off the battlefield.”

The next generation, duh echoes the sounds of Trudeau rethinking the universe again. The current generation in Canada and worldwide will be the last generation before sharia is instituted worldwide if it is not halted in Canada now! The Syrian Refugee Program is perhaps the last mistake allowable that can be rectified. Take another look at the group of Conclusion Boys above.

Now look at this group of Conclusion Boys and then you make a Conclusion as to who needs deradicalization the most. Is it the Tajikistan troop above or these Syrian refugees gleefully living off the fat of our land? How many of you out of work and single parent families are able to dress your children in such a manner for another free ‘recreation day’ in Canada? For certain 1 out of the 5 seated ‘new Canadians’ is the “I listen and I obey” type and all five for certain are Muslim and ultimately will ‘cut off their own blaspheming hand”. There is no Islam or Muslim that can be deradicalized from it, for the beliefs that define true Islam are all radical. Brand 13 Kids are a reality and there still remain ‘lots of kafir to kill over here’.

We might start to rectify the problem by making use of the refurbished military bases that were not suitable accommodation for our incoming rush of refugees. The DND spent $6.4M renovating buildings for refugee housing that went unused. And Defence Minister Old Bad Ass Harjit Sajjan said ‘duh! no problem’ . His written response to questioning was “Renovations would be absorbed by the Defence Department’s existing budget and that the spending would not affect “current operations or current capabilities.” And Immigration Minister Jack Ass John McCallum said ‘duh! No problem’.

Do you feel like I have been beating on you pretty hard in these matters? Well, you can rest assured that the beating you are going to take shall be far worse if you do not start making some hard but necessary decisions.

Liberal political fools and stooge appointees are a problem to one and all. So let us start by making use of the money already spent and commence making Canada a Muslim Free Zone. Gather the Syrians back into the military bases, isolate them and escort them all back out to their points of boarding planes when coming here. Whether you like it or not Canada you are involved in a spiritual battle with everything Muslim as birthed from the Qur’an. So read these words carefully: “Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets; behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.” (Acts 13:40-41)

The work I have been declaring to you is true and you reading are now being given a final choice as to where you are going to align yourself in the spiritual battle underway. You cannot ‘lie la lie’ to yourself about the Truth I’ve presented and emerge unscathed from this time forward. You are being given 5 minutes and 8 seconds to come to your conclusion. It is the length of time it takes listening to Simon & Garfunkel – The Boxer (with lyrics) Wrong conclusions now and you simply are ‘dead meat’.

“Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” (Gal 4:16) Only if you remain a dhimmi or a Muslim, for I am a fighter by my trade!

Whatever, many Canadians are dumber than Obama. Islam is terrorism, Islam is the problem along with Canada’s religious and political community continuing a stance of not calling it for exactly what it is. Islam is evil as it brings up killers from one generation to the next as required of its true followers. Do you not get the link?

However, to end all debate surrounding the matter of ‘honor killing’ and its being sanctioned fully by Islam I am attaching one of the best and most complete coverages of the topic I have found. It is written in a manner that is superb in its format and easy to understand while giving all references in Qur’an and Hadith to prove the claims stated about Islam.

From the Introduction: “Honor Killing is the shocking cruelty committed by Muslim family members. The perpetrators in every case are the family members. Honor Killing is a family collaboration. And the victims who are killed are either the daughter or sister or other blood related young women. The crime is usually carried out by the father, brothers or uncles of the victims. However, mothers too have participated in Honor Killing. The victims are killed or slaughtered in a cold-blooded manner. These barbaric killings are executed for the single purpose of saving the honor of the family. Honor Killing is a manifestation of a global phenomenon among Muslims. The purpose of this article is to expose the myth that Honor Killing is not Islamic but a cultural practice. It will be proven conclusively that Honor Killing is not only Islamic but it is also based on the teachings of the Qur’an. In fact, it will be proven, step by step, how the Qur’an nurtures and grooms the Muslim mind to murder in the name of Honor. But more importantly, the purpose of this article is to alert those who are ignorant of Islam. Many are unaware that Islam is a cult of death. It is a blood-thirsty religion. It lives and grows by shedding blood. Islam teaches that by spilling blood as a sacred duty, Muslims can reap personal rewards. Please read this article carefully. Share it with those you know. Use it to educate your family and friends about Islam. Perhaps you may save a life. Silence in the face of evil is evil itself.” Read on >

It is claimed Muhammad said: “The Sunna can dispense with the Qur’an, but not the Qur’an with the Sunna”.

Sunna means “path” and refers to a normal custom of Muhammad or practices of the early Islamic community.

The hadith “justify and confirm” the Sunna or practices of Muhammad. As such, hadith which means story or narrative, refers to any report of what the Muslim prophet Muhammad said or did, or his tacit assent to something said or done in his presence. So, if the opening statement is true than Muhammad is stating what he did, or even reports of what he did through hadith overrule what is stated in the Qur’an. In other words, his words and actions outrank Allah.

Now, hadith is also used as the technical term for the “science”, study and judgment of such traditional practices and reported statements by Muhammad. As a result of a lengthy process of study for centuries after Muhammad’s death in 632, the hadith emerged for most Muslims as second in authority to the Qur’an itself.

It was the great early 20th century professor of Islam, Henri Lammens, who highlights how the great contradictory mess of Qur’an, sunna and hadith became entangled as the ‘great blsh,blah,blah’ and waring elements of Islam today. He states: As early as the first century A.H. [the seventh century] the following aphorism was pronounced: “The Sunna can dispense with the Qur’an, but not the Qur’an with the Sunna.” Proceeding to still further lengths, some Muslims assert that “in controversial matters, the Sunna overrules the authority of the Qur’an, but not vice versa” . . . all admit the Sunna completes and explains it [the Qur’an].” There we have it. Men over ruling their God.

Where Lammens found the aphorism, I do not know. What I do know is when you study it through Islam is one sex laden complimentary mess of contradictions, but a mess that does unequivocally advocate a demonic suppression of women. And it demands a submission of all human beings to itself or be prepared to face their death.

Right to the end of the world and onward to eternity, the focus of Islam remains that of the priority upon a man’s right to sexual gratification.

It is eternal torment for non-believers and virgins for the devout.

An-Nisa 4:56-57 “Indeed, those who disbelieve in Our verses – We will drive them into a Fire. Every time their skins are roasted through We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the punishment. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted in Might and Wise. But those who believe and do righteous deeds – We will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they abide forever. For them therein are purified spouses, and We will admit them to deepening shade.”

All men will know doom except for the single-minded slaves of Allah will enjoy a Garden filled with lovely-eyed virgins.

As-Saffat 37:40-49: “Save single-minded slaves of Allah; For them there is a known provision, And they will be honored In the Gardens of delight, On couches facing one another; A cup from a gushing spring is brought round for them, White, delicious to the drinkers, Wherein there is no headache nor are they made mad thereby. And with them are those of modest gaze, with lovely eyes, (Pure) as they were hidden eggs (of the ostrich).”

In the paradise of Islam there are claimed to be 72 virgins with appetizing vaginas for every man. And, to deal with them all Allah has granted them an eternal erection.

“Each time we sleep with a Houri we find her virgin. Besides, the penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal; the sensation that you feel each time you make love is utterly delicious and out of this world and were you to experience it in this world you would faint. Each chosen one [i.e. Muslim] will marry seventy houris, besides the women he married on earth, and all will have appetizing vaginas.” (Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an, p. 351)

And Allah has not forgotten to include big boobies for the boys. An-Naba 78:33 ”And full-breasted [companions] of equal age.” I have not bothered trying to sort out whether all the girls are of the same age or their boobs are all the same size. But al-Waqi’ah 56:35-37 states “Indeed, We have produced the women of Paradise in a [new] creation And made them virgins, Devoted [to their husbands] and of equal age.” So, I think my money goes on both equal age and equal size boobs, for this would certainly stop any eternal squabbling among the wives to distract our man from concentrating upon his eternal erection.

But, as to the number of virgins deployed and the former wives purified for reassignment the numbers of 72 surrounding each is specified in the hadith. And, whatever the numbers we know that our mighty Muslim male will never again be separated from his sex supply be it from the new virgins or the reconditioned and totally obedient and devoted spouses.

However, the current practiced methods of Islamic separation of spouses remain: 1) Talaq, the granting of divorce by the husband. 2) Khul, separation by way of consent between the parties. 3) Faskh, the annulment of marriage through Islamic Sharia Tribunals or offices of the qadis. 4) Tafweedh-e-Talaq, entailing the transfer of the power of talaq to the wife. 5) Murder, through the enactments of honor killings.

Islam sanctions all this. Thus, Islam and its proponents can no longer be sanctioned in Canada. Charges shall be placed before the RCMP Major Crimes Unit for investigation and prosecution under the appropriate sectors of Canadian Jurisprudence by mid 2017. This is but one of the five sectors that legal action shall be pursued in Canada against the practices of Islam.

The video raises concerns about Trudeau’s associations with various Islamic groups and individuals in Canada; his recitation of the Muslim convert’s “shahada” prayer during a visit to a particular mosque; and much more. We’ll let the video speak for itself and let you make up your own minds about it!

Send Justin Trudeau the message that he does not represent you anymore and demand that he resigns from the office of Prime Minister. Include in you demand that all Muslim MP’s resign as well, for there is no place for Islam in the Canadian government.

The safety and well-being of Canada and its citizens must be the first priority of the federal government, not the advance of Trudeau’s Islamic invasion.